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 2
HEARINGS
BEFORB THE
COMMITTEE ON UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
EIGHTY-EIGHTH CONGKESS
SECOND SESSION
FEBRUARY 20, APRIL 7 AND 8, AND MAY 19 AND 20, 1964
(INCLUDING INDEX)
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Un-American Activities
harvar:
UNITED STATtftOVERNMEf;!.
DEC ,4 ^964
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
30-471 WASHINGTON : 1964
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Wastiington, D.C., 20402 - Price $1.25
COMMITTEE ON UN-AMERIOAN ACTIVITIES
United States House of Repbesentatives
EDWIN E. WILLIS, Louisiana, Chairman
"WILLIAM M. TUCK, Virginia AUGUST E. JOHANSEN, Michigan
JOE R. POOL. Texas DONALD C. BRUCE, Indiana
BICnARD H. ICHORD, Missouri HENRY C. SCHADEBERG, Wisconsin
GEORGE F. SENNER, JE., Arizona JOHN M. ASHBROOK, Ohio
Francis J. McNamara, Director
Feank S. Tavenner, Jr., Oeneral Counsel
Alfred M. Nittlb, Counsel
William Hitz, Counsel
n
CONTENTS
February 20, 1964: Statement of— Paet
Hon. Richard S. Schweiker 1243
Hon. W. Averell Harriman 1249
Hon. Robert Taft, Jr 1271
Gerhart Niemeyer 1274
Afternoon session:
Lev E. Dobriansky 1279
Hon. Robert R. Barry 1300
William R. Kintner 1305
Hon. Bob Wilson 1313
April 7, 1964: Statement of—
Hon. Robert C. Hill 1316
Robert Finley Delaney 1319
H. Stuart Morrison 1342
Christopher Emmet 1351
Afternoon session:
H. Stuart Morrison (resumed) 1360
Herbert Philbrick 1365
Clarence H. Olson 1378
Daniel J. O'Connor 1379
April 8, 1964: Statement of—
Michael C. Conley 1385
Hon. Charles S. Gubser 1411
May 19, 1964: Statement of —
Hon. Dante B. Fascell 1417
John Richardson, Jr 1419
Reserve Officers Association of the United States 1420
Adm. Arleigh A. Burke 1420
Hon. John O. Marsh, Jr 1450
Paul Jones 1454
May 20, 1964: Statement of—
Hon. Don H. Clausen 1457
Hon. Adolf A. Berle 1465
Dickey Chapelle '. 1485
James Robinson 1494
Afternoon session:
Walter Joyce 1509
Louis Dona O'Hara for Taxpayers League of Blackstone Valley,
Providence and Providence Plantations 1514
Index— Parts 1 and 2 i
m
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 hy the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States
of America in Congress assembled, * * *
PART 2— RULES OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Rule X
SEC. 121. STANDING COMMITTEES
*******
17. Committee on Un-American Activities, to consist of nine Members.
Rule XI
POWERS AND DUTIES OF COMMITTEES
* * * » * * *
(q) (1) Committee on Un-American Activities.
(A) Un-American activities.
(2) Ttie Committee on Un-American Activities, as a whole or by subcommit-
tee, is authorized to make from time to time investigations of (i) the extent,
character, and objects of un-American propaganda 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 neces-
sary 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 i)erson
designated by any such chairman or member.
***»••*
Rule XII
LEGISLATIVE OVERSIGHT BY STANDING COMMITTEE
Sec. 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.
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
POWERS 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-Ammerican 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. Subpeuas 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 i)ertinent reports and data submitted to the House by
the agencies in the executive branch of the Government.
V
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, H.R. 11718, PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A
FREEDOM COMMISSION AND FREEDOM ACADEMY
Part 2
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1964
United States House of Representatives,
Committee on Un-American Activities,
Washington^ D.G.
public hearings
The Committee on Un-American Activities met, pursuant to recess,
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; William M. Tuck, of Virginia; Joe R. Pool, of Texas;
Richard H. Ichord, of Missouri; August E. Johansen, of Michigan;
and Henry C. Schadeberg, of Wisconsin.
Staff members present : Francis J. McNamara, director, and Alfred
M. Nittle, counsel.
The Chairman. The committee will please come to order.
We are pleased to have with us as our first witness this morning Mr.
Schweiker of Pennsylvania, an author of one of the bills we are
presently considering.
Mr. Schweiker, we are delighted to have you, and look forward to
hearing your statement.
STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD S. SCHWEIKER, U.S.
REPRESENTATIVE EROM PENNSYLVANIA
Mr. ScHWEiBLER. Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee : I ap-
preciate the opportunity to appear before the committee this morning
in support of legislation creating a Freedom Commission and a Free-
dom Academy.
I sponsored such legislation in the first session of the 87th Congress
and reintroduced this proposal as H.R. 8757 in the current Congress.
I am particularly pleased to note that this idea has received wide-
spread sponsorship within both parties and throughout the broad
spectrimi of political philosophies.
Few today would question the fact that the Communist bloc is
waging total political warfare against the United States and other
peoples of the free world. Unfortunately, in many instances the Com-
1243
1244 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
munists have won important battles because they have so adroitly
fashioned propaganda and political skills into weapons equally as
dangerous to our freedom as bombs and missiles. Using an elaborate
network of training schools, the Communists have developed their
version of political warfare into a highly effective operational science.
Every citizen, every economic, cultural, religious, or ethnic group is a
target and may come mider direct or indirect Communist attack.
For several decades the forces of communism have carefully pre-
pared their conspirators with the means to engage in new forms of
struggle using the techniques of political, ideological, and psy-
chological assault. They have employed an elaborate research and
training system and have succeeded in imparting this knowledge to
their followers. Their success, it seems to me, is due in large measure
to the careful preparation and training which they have given to their
collaborators.
If the peoples of the free world are to defeat the Soviet political
warfare offensive, they must understand the true nature of the inter-
national Communist conspiracy and the dimensions of the global strug-
gle between freedom and communism. Only with such an under-
standing of the scope and nature of the threat can people be expected
to know how to participate in the continuing struggle in an effective,
sustained, and systematic mamier.
This Nation has been careful to prepare adequately for military
conflict with the forces of communism. But our preparation to win
the cold war through other than military means has been woefully
inadequate. We have properly devoted great efforts and developed
our service academies to achieve hot war capabilities, but we have
neglected to develop the expertise and facilities needed to wage and
win the cold war.
The bills under consideration today would create a nonpartisan
seven-member Freedom Commission and, under its jurisdiction, a Free-
dom Academy, an advanced research, training, and development cen-
ter. The Freedom Commission and Freedom Academy would fill the
current void in United States cold war efforts. Members of the Com-
mission would be appointed by the President and not more than four
could be members of any one political party. H.E>. 8757, which I have
introduced, would provide that one member of the Commission would
be selected from the higher echelon of the State Department.
The Freedom Academy would provide Government personnel, pri-
vate citizens, and foreign students with professional training in the
political, economic, ideological, psychological, and paramilitary as-
pects of the cold war. The program would include study of our na-
tional purpose and objectives, as well as the development of proposals
for coordinating various methods into strategy for victory. Students
at the Freedom Academy would be educated in all aspects of com-
munism, the nature of the worldwide struggle between communism
and freedom, and the science of counteraction to the Red conspiracy.
They would be selected from diverse groups within the United States
and in other countries, where trained leadership and informed public
opinion are most needed.
I hardly need point out to my colleagues that the Communists have
been most active in providing such training for thousands of persons
from other nations. I think it important that we remember the fan-
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1245
tastic success which the Communists have achieved in recruiting the
young elite in the developing nations. It is difficult for us in the
United States to fully comprehend the extraordinary ambition within
the youth of these countries. The strong nationalistic forces which
prevail impart to the young people a great sense of urgency about the
need for modernization and reform. They desire to lead. The Com-
munists have been eager to teach them the deceitful Red tecliniques of
leadership and power acquisition.
Under H.R. 8757, the Freedom Commission would be authorized to
make grants to Academy students, to pay expenses incident to their
training, and to provide financial assistance to their dependents dur-
ing the training period. The Commission could also establish an in-
formation center to distribute publications and other materials de-
signed to assist people in better understanding the Commmiist threat
and the means to combat it.
Representatives from the private sector — labor, business, colleges,
and schools — could attend the special classes at the Freedom Academy.
In this connection I think it is appropriate to note the outstanding
work which the AFL-CIO has been doing in Latin America. Through
the Institute for Free Labor Development, American labor is pro-
viding Latin American workers with the knowledge to develop stable
and democratic organizations. Representatives in this private orga-
nization are working with members and officers of the Latin Ameri-
can unions who are engaged in the desperate struggle against the re-
sourceful Communists, who seek to subvert and destroy legitimate labor
organizations, as they did in Cuba. What could be better than to
have available t<3 such officials a training ground such as the Freedom
Academy would provide. Then, too, I believe the Freedom Academy
could make an important contribution to the field of business, particu-
larly with those representatives of business who would be working
abroad.
I would envision the Freedom Academy providing traming of vary-
ing duration and intensity for professional and officer persoimel
throughout Government who serve in positions related to foreign af-
fairs and security activities. Officers at the lower echelons might be
trained between 6 months and 1 year, while those at midcareer and in
top-echelon posts would be trained for longer periods, ranging per-
haps up to 2 years.
Creation of a Freedom Academy would meet the first important
test in winning any struggle: know your enemy. In many ways, the
Communist forces are a imique enemy relying on total warfare, with
political, economic, ideological, and psychological measures organized
as systematically and as efficiently as military power. Primary weap-
ons are lying words; deception; infiltration into educational, religious,
labor, and farm groups; and political subversion. One of our chief
difficulties in the cold war has been that we have not mastered, or
even fully recognized, this unorthodox form of warfare. Obviously,
our moral standards will not permit us to employ many of the tactics
used by the Communists. But our Nation can launch a crusade for
freedom in the minds of men, using the "big truth" as often as the
Communists use the "big lie." The Freedom Academy would be-
come "the West Point of the cold war," permitting us to send pro-
1246 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
fessionals rather than amateurs into the battle against communism
and helping to avoid more Cubas,
I would like to emphasize my strong belief that the Freedom Acad-
emy, to accomplish its purposes, must be a first-class academic institu-
tion. It must be able to attract the top minds in our country, among
them some of our leading university scholars.
One reservation which has been raised by some persons not enthu-
siastic about the Freedom Academy proposal is that such a school
could conceivably be used by an administration for its own partisan
purjDoses as a political propaganda school. I feel that the independ-
ence of the Freedom Commission and its bipartisan nature provide
adequate protection from such an occurrence. As a matter of fact,
this is one of the distinct advantages which I find in the Freedom
Academy and Freedom Commission proposal as contrasted with the
proposal to create a National Academy of Foreign Affairs. The Na-
tional Academy of Foreign Affairs would be much more closely asso-
ciated with the administration in power and, I fear, would suffer from
an ingrown viewpoint serving primarily the interests of one depart-
ment.
In pressing for creation of a Freedom Academy, I express my con-
viction that the United States must develop an extensive program for
nonmilitary conflict. The Communists already have such an effective
program, and it has become evident that nonmilitary action often is
the decisive factor in international conflict. The United States has
done little to train its governmental officials, let alone its private citi-
zens, in this nonmilitary conflict.
I see the Freedom Academy as an essential addition to our weapons
system in our arsenal of peaceful means to curb and set back the Com-
munist challenge. It is to be not an operational agency, but rather a
valuable research and training institution.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, JVIr. Schweiker. We cer-
tainly are indebted to you for your clear and enlightening statement.
We will, of course, give an ear to you and to all other witnesses in
trying to find a solution to the problem we are faced with.
Are there any questions ?
Mr. Pool. I do not believe so.
Mr. IcHORD. Mr. Chairman, I have one question.
Mr. Schweiker, the criticism has been made of all four of these bills
that there is danger in the establishment of such an institution in that
it might fall in the wrong hands. Do you consider there to be any
validity to that criticism ?
Mr. Schweiker. I think the fact that you are putting it directly
under the President in terms of the appointments, the fact that it is
bipartisan in nature, and the hope that we would pick the highest
caliber men for this Commission would negate that viewpoint. I will
admit it might be a danger, but I think it is a very remote one and I
think it is one risk we should take because we have done very little in
this area.
Mr. IcHORD. Now your bill was the last one to be introduced on this
subject. I notice that you have omitted the Advisory Committee, nor
have you provided for a Joint Congressional Freedom Committee as
one of the other bills provides. Don't you think that there would be
some necessity for an Advisory Committee to coordinate the activities
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1247
of the various agencies involved in this problem of fighting com-
munism ?
(At this point Mr. Schadeberg entered the hearing room.)
Mr. ScHWEiKER. I can see some logic for an Advisory Committee,
Dick. My reason for omitting it was that I just did not want to see us
follow the stereotyped departmental approach of the past.
I think that too often this has been our thinking, that we channel
our thinking into either the diplomatic field or the military field.
And my contention is that this dichotomy is what has defeated us in
the cold war up to this point, that we think of dealing with the So\det
Union through diplomacy or through military might, and these fields
are not where we are getting behind. We are doing all right in these
two fields.
The area in between the diplomatic field and the military field is the
new, uncharted ground, and I have a little concern about putting all
these formal organizations back into the picture in that maybe we will
revert to one or the other type of thinking. However, I am not
strongly opposed to it.
Mr. IcHORD. Of course, the members of the Commission would be
independent appointees of the President.
Mr. ScHWEiKER. That is right. I mean in terms of the Advisory
Committee, might — in other words, I am trying to get away from
some of our past departmental thinking, because I feel that this brings
us back to what I call an inadequate approach through either military
or diplomatic channels, which the Communists have long ago aban-
doned and now use any means to gain their ends in the cold war.
That is why I want to see the Commission independent and why_ I
did not put that provision in the bill. However, there is some merit in
the provision.
Mr. IcHORD. That is all, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Mr. Chairman, I have one question.
I think I am correct in the observation that you have omitted the
paragraph which was found in section 13 of Congressman Herlong's
bill, which provides that the Committee shall transmit to the Presi-
dent and to the Congress in January of each year a report containing
a comprehensive description of plans, programs, and activities of
the Commission and Academy during the preceding year and its
recommendations for the improvement of those programs and
activities.
(At this point Mr. Tuck entered the hearing room.)
(At this point Mr. Willis left the hearing room.)
Mr. JoHANSEN. I wonder if there was a reason that you omitted
this annual report requirement, particularly to the Congress?
Mr. ScHWEiKER. No, sir; I will say if it was omitted it was an
oversight. I would certainly concur that this should be in there.
Mr. JoHANSEN. I am glad to hear you say that, because I think
there is a very important overseeing role for the Congress and I
think that is the safeguard, one safeguard, against the concern my
colleague expressed.
Mr. IcHORD. Well, I believe — if the gentleman will yield — Mr.
Johansen, he omitted the entire Advisory Committee, and Mr. Her-
long had the Advisory Committee reporting to Congress rather than
the Commission, itself.
1248 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
Mr. JoHANSEN. Well, and I share your question as to the advisabil-
ity of omitting the Advisory Committee but, regardless of that, it
would seem to me imperative, as I am sure is the case with those other
commissions or independent agencies, that the requirement of the
report to the Congress be included.
I think that is a safeguard against the kind of misuse Avhich the
gentleman has expressed.
Mr. IcHORD. Definitely so.
Mr. ScHWEiKER. I w^ould certainly concur with that. This was an
omission that should be included; a report from the Commission to
Congress.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Thank you.
Mr. Tuck (presiding) . Any further questions, gentler.ien '.
Mr. ScHADEBERG. No questions.
Mr. Tuck. We thank you. Do you have anything further to say ?
Mr. ScHWEiKER. Sir ?
Mr. Tuck. Did you have any further statement ?
Mr. ScHWEiKER. Just one or two observations that were not in my
statement. I think it is significant that there have been approximately
20 revolutionary overthrows of governments since 1945, and with one
exception, which I think was Czechoslovakia, in each case the gov-
ernment in power had the preponderant military power. So here is a
case where they had the renis of government. They had the military
power, and yet the Communists through the methods that we are not
familiar with were able to overthrow 20 governments.
There has never been one instance of a Communist government being
overthrown. So I think just the score to date would indicate we have
a tremendous void and that we have really wasted our efforts by not
filling it. Also it has been estimated — I am not sure of the reliability
of this figure — that the Communists have about 100 schools of political
warfare throughout the world. I do not know if that is quite accurate
but I am sure it is somewhere in that area. It is rather ironic that they
have 100 schools to do what we have not yet done and that we, with all
our schools and universities in the United States, do not yet have one
school in this field. Maybe that is why we have lost the cold war so
far as the 20 revolutions are concerned.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Mr. Chairman, may I just ask one further question?
Mr. Tuck. Yes, sir.
Mr. JoHANSEN. One of the things that concerns me is whether this
can be truly an independent Commission and agency to the point that
it will carry on its function without the charge by the State Depart-
ment that it is running contrary to national })olicy. And to put it in
the simplest terms, if this Commission is developing evidence and
promulgating the fact that the designs of international communism
remain unchanged and the State Department decides that this is con-
tributing to tensions, I think it is tremendously important that this
agency not be subservient to the current line of the agency to the point
that it has to say that, after all, communism is getting mellower and
mellower and we do not want to have tensions anyway, so that it be-
comes subordinate to the official propaganda line of the Department.
Mr. Sciiwt:iker. I would certainly concur with you, Mr. Johansen.
I think that is very important and why the independent nature of this
Commission is so important. I want to say, though, that we should
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1249
not lose sight of the fact that this is basically a training and research
group and not operational.
Mr, JoHANSEN. I understand that. That is important.
Mr. ScHWEiKER. I think that State might be a little bit unjustified
in claiming this, because it is not an operational agency, but I agree
there is a danger that exists here and I certainly concur.
Mr. JoiiANSEX. Well, we have the distinguished representative of
the State Department, who has just arrived, so we will let him respond
to that question.
Mr. Tuck. Well, we thank you very much, Congressman
Mr. ScHWEiKER. Thank you.
Mr. Tuck. ■ — ^f or appearing before this committee.
Mr. ScH^\^EIKER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Tuck. I noticed the arrival of Secretary Harriman and I
believe he is next on the list. We will be delighted to hear from the
Secretary at this time.
STATEMENT OP HON. W. AVERELL HARRIMAN, UNDER SECRETARY
OF STATE FOR POLITICAL AFFAIRS
Mr. Harriman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the
committee.
If I may speak personally for one moment, this is the first op-
portunity that I have had to express to you the great sorrow that I
share in the loss of your former chairman. Congressman Walter. I
knew him over the years and considered him a friend and shared the
loss with you. I appreciate the opportunity of recording that in the
record of your minutes. He was a great patriot.
Mr. Tuck. Thank you very much. We miss him greatly here on
this conunittee, not only a very fine patriotic person, but one of the
most distinguished members in our entire work.
Mr. Harriman. Mr. Chairman, I have been asked to appear before
your committee and speak for the Department of Commerce. I
have a brief statement, a copy of which has been furnished to you
and the members of the committee, which I shall read, if I may.
Mr. Tuck. You said the Department of Conunerce. I believe you
meant the Department of State ?
Mr. Harriman. The Department of State. I beg your pardon. I
used to speak for the Department of Commerce.
I appreciate this opportunity, Mr. Chairman, to present the views
of the Department of State on the bills pending before this commit-
tee relating to the establishment of a Freedom Commission and Free-
dom Academy.
As the committee knows, the administration last year proposed
establishment of a National Academy of Foreign Affairs — a proposal
aimed primarily at improving education and training of many thou-
sands of officers and employees of the Federal Government who are
already engaged in work directly affecting foreign affairs and national
security.
We believe the National Academy of Foreign Affairs proposal is
the more appropriate and more effective way to accomplish what we
understand to be the basic objectives which we share with the pro-
ponents of the Freedom Academy. The administration feels this is
1250 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
the better way to help win the cold war and advance our interests
abroad.
I have been concerned over the dangers of communism since the
Bolshevik revolution in Russia. I have had direct experience in deal-
ing with Cormnunist imperialism — in many forms and m various in-
ternational and domestic situations — since the twenties. Chairman
Khrushchev told me when I was in Moscow last summer that "there
can be no coexistence in ideology; that conflict goes on." Mr. Gro-
myko confirmed this in his recent speech at the United Nations when
he said there could be no compromise in ideology.
We all know that the Communist effort against the free world is
conducted in many ways, that the developing countries are particu-
larly vulnerable to Communist penetration, and that these pose a
massive set of problems for the United States. It is clear that we
need to train people throughout the Government who can meet these
problems, indeed all our national security problems, with all the tools
available.
However, the administration believes the Ffeedom Cormnission
proposal would not be an effective answer to our present training re-
quirements. Moreover, it would not provide a practical administra-
tive setup, in our judgment.
Wliile the objectives which have moved the sponsors of the Freedom
Commission are certainly worthy, I would not be helpful to this com-
mittee if I failed to pinpoint some of our differences in viewpoint and
emphasis.
First, the Freedom Conunission proposal places great stress upon
the mobilization of private citizens — domestic and foreign — to fight
the cold war and upon the systematic indoctrination of our citizens
against communism. It contemplates that both tasks be undertaken
on a large scale by the executive branch of the Government.
The administration believes that in certain circumstances it is useful
to train U.S. citizens who are not in the Government, as well as foreign
nationals. But what we need first and most is to improve in all possi-
ble ways training of Government personnel involved in the conduct
of foreign affairs. This training should be conducted on an inter-
departmental basis and should be directly connected with research in
depth into past successes and failures and possible future courses of
action in foreign affairs.
This, the administration now seeks to do, with limited resources at
the Foreign Service Institute of the State Department and in other
ways. Establishment of a National Academy of Foreign Affairs
would greatly improve our current efforts to give advanced training
to officers of the State Department and the many other Government
agencies involved with foreign affairs.
Much of this training, of course, depends on the use of classified
materials.
Certainly, any effective research requires, or is very much assisted
by, the availability of classified materials. This creates another prob-
lem with regard to the training of outsiders.
I think it is obvious that the use of classified materials would be
impossible if private citizens or noncitizens were to be trained on any
sizable scale. It is also likely that the freedom of discussion within
the classroom would^ — and properly should — ^be inhibited by the pres-
ence of students from even the most closely allied countries.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1251
Even if this were not a problem, the training of foreign nationals
on a large scale by the United States Government in a Federal institu-
tion could be self-defeating. If such students returned home and
organized anti-Communist movements — as I believe the Freedom
Academy proponents contemplate — they would be instantly labeled
"Yankee stooges." In those rare but inevitable cases where they
returned home and joined the ranks of anti- American subversion, the
propaganda possibilities for the Communists would be even richer.
In this respect, let us not forget the Soviet failures to win the minds
of many of the African students they have tried to indoctrinate at
Patrice Lumumba University. And, incidentally, I may say they
have failed in the indoctrination of their own university students, if
my information is correct — at least, the overwhelming majority of
them.
Unquestionably, the American educational system is a magnificent
tool with which to develop an understanding of the fundamental
hmnan value of freedom. There are 50,000 foreign students now in
the United States, taking training in a wide variety of specialties,
in all kinds of American schools. The same is true of the military
personnel that are over here in our military schools. It is surely
better to have foreign students in our schools and homes and see
the way we live, rather than try to indoctrinate them in a Govern-
ment institution. In this way, freedom has been allowed to speak
for itself to these people. And freedom is, by definition, its own best
advocate. That is our strength. It is always a mistake, in my
opinion, to adopt the methods of the enemies of freedom.
We have, however, a strong interest to help increase the knowledge
and capacity of governments and peoples on how to deal effectively
with Communist tactics in their own countries. These efforts are
being expanded. In Latin America, for example, we are helping to
improve the capacity of governments and peoples to deal with gen-
eral and local Communist infiltration and subversion, both through the
Organization of American States and through bilateral measures.
Students and other peoples in that region are becoming increasingly
able to deal with Communist efforts to control and manipulate them,
altliough the problem is still unsolved.
All over the world, we are also helping to strengthen free labor
unions against communism. In the same way, we are attempting to
strengthen the youth movements against Communist infiltration.
If we consider solely the training of private U.S. citizens, the prob-
lems are somewhat different in nature, but they are equally great.
The United States Government should and does maintain informal
links with all sectors of our society. The Department of State, in par-
ticular, brings leaders from business, labor, and the academic world
together to discuss foreign policy problems. In these efforts, the
learning process is an invaluable two-way thing.
In addition, the Department of State and other agencies of Govern-
ment produce a steady flow of pamphlets, reports, and other educa-
tional material which is of great value to the general public.
Another question raised by tlie bills before you today involves Fed-
eral control. The Freedom Commission, to quote from PT.R. 852,
would he "authorized to prepare, make, and publish textbooks and
•other materials, including training films, suitable for high school.
1252 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
college, and community level instruction." The bill further provides
that the Commission can distribute such material on "such terms and
conditions as the Commission shall determine."
This seems to me to be a drastic departure from our traditions of the
Federal Govermnent's role in the field of education. In all the far-
ranging controversies over Federal aid to, and responsibility for, edu-
cation, I have seldom heard even the most zealous proponent of such
aid recommend that the Federal Government enter the field of text-
book preparation. I can think of no aspect of education more uni-
versally regarded as outside the province of the Federal Government
as the preparation of textbooks.
It is not the business of the Federal Government to indoctrinate our
citizens. I fear that such a Freedom Commission would be charged
with being a tax-supported, federally managed effort at mass indoctri-
nation.
One other aspect of this proposed legislation also disturbs me — •
the organization of the Freedom Commission. As I read the bills,
the Commission would be an independent agency of the Government
with no operational responsibilities. Yet, even training cannot be
completely divorced from operations, particularly in the crisis-ridden
field of foreign affairs. Training has to be realistically geared to
actual day-to-day problems and the needs of the Government, and
our personnel must have access to classified materials in order to ac-
complish their job.
That is veiy briefly, sir, the statement which I have prepared to
submit to your committee.
Mr. Tuck. Thank you veiy much, sir.
As I understand your proposal for the National Academy of For-
eign Affairs, the principal difference between that and the bills we are
considering here is that you propose to train people who are already in
the governmental service, or who are going into the governmental
service.
Mr. Haeriman. Yes.
Mr. Tuck. You are opposed to the training of people who are not
in the Govermnent service or the people who come from foreign
countries ?
Mr. Harriman. Of course the admission of specially selected for-
eign government personnel has not been fully considered in our War
Colleges. However, in our War Colleges, foreign military students
from countries who are our allies are admitted and have special train-
ing, but the principal purpose of the academy that the State Depart-
ment proposes is to train the Foreign Service officers in the State De-
partment and officers of all other departments of the Government who
have contact with foreign affairs.
They would have access, of course, to classified material and expert
instruction on the specific problems in which they are engaged and also
on the specific problems of the day as we face the changing world scene.
They would have other advantages, of course, in addition to the fight
on communism, but I, for one, believe that the fight with international
communism is our major foreign policy problem and attention should
be given of the highest priority.
We have also problems of the bringing together the free countries
for common action, the problems of how to solve issues between na-
PROVIDING YOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1253
tions that are friendly to us, and the strengthening of the free world
is an important aspect of the fight against communism.
We are not the only country fightmg communism. We are one of a
group of countries that are dedicated to preserve their own freedom
and to protect freedom in the world.
Mr. Tuck. To comment on other aspects of your statement, in
stating my views on it, I might say that I wholeheartedly believe in
one statement that you made, and that is that I am opposed to the
Federal Government preparing textbooks to be used in the States. I
thuik that that is a matter for the States to interpret. I believe that
it is better to leave the education of our children in the public schools
to the people of the States.
Mr. Pool. Mr. Chairman, may I interrupt right along there ?
Mr. Tuck. Yes, sir.
Mr. Pool. That is all true, and I agree with you, but on the other
hand, as I view this problem, we are deciding whether or not we will
have professionals in the field of political warfare. Of course we do
have ROTC in the high schools, and things like that. We do have
the Federal Government that trains our officers in military warfare.
As I see this problem, it is a little different fi^om the average prob-
lem on Federal control of education, which I am opposed to.
I am really kind of surprised at the State Department bringing up
the argument of Federal control of education, because in most cases
they would be pushing for more Federal controls. I just wanted to
make that comment.
JVIr. Tuck. Do you have any questions ?
Mr. Harriman. Well, this is only one side. I am glad to hear what
you say and I am sure you would have felt that way. This is only one
aspect of the bill which I mention in passing, but it does relate to the
whole principle of the Federal Govermnent attempting to have an
indoctrination course for its citizens. It takes on the methods of the
Soviet Union. They have indoctrmation of all of their citizens, and
I am very glad to say that the more recent reports indicate that they
are not able to brainwash this present generation of young people who
are now in the universities of the Soviet Union.
Our information may not be accurate, but all we have indicates that,
although there are some very ardent Communists, there are a great
many of them who are not impressed and are longing for the kind of
freedoms that our system provides — the right to read, the right to
debate, the right to write what they feel like writing, and above all,,
the right to travel.
(At this point Mr. Schadeberg left the hearing room.)
Mr. Pool. Mr. Chairman, may I reply to that ?
I think that we certainly are not doing all that we can in the field
of political warfare and I think that is the main purpose of this bill.
Certainly we are going to have to use revolutionary and new ideas, and
if we copy the Soviets on this point, it is all right with me.
I will copy them or add to it or use our own imagination to try to
improve on it and come out with a better system, but I think it is so
important that we do get into this problem and come up with some-
thing that is a practical approach.
Mr. PIarriman. Well, Congressman Pool, I fully agree that we are
not doing everything we can do. There is great room for improve-
30-471— 64— pt. 2 2
1254 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
ment. I have been involved in this thing since I came back from the
Soviet Union in 1945. I said we were going to have problems with
the Soviet Union. In fact, I said our objectives were irreconcilable.
At that time, there was a wave of enthusiasm in the country for our
allies and I was considered an outcast. I have been considered an out-
cast on many occasions and if this committee considers me one, I am
soriy, but I am a professional in this business and I have been at it
for many, many years. And I do not think, sir, that this Freedom
Academy is the right way to go about fighting communism.
(At this point Mr. Schadeberg returned to the hearing room.)
Mr. Harriman. We have a series of programs to train individuals
for particular purposes, and also foreign individuals. I talked yes-
terday to our Police Academy, which brings the heads or senior men
of police forces from different countries. Not only do we train them
on how to organize and maintain law and order in a democracy, but
also how to deal with internal subversion. It is a very effective
course.
I am only mentioning that as one case. There were 30-odd senior
men in the police departments of a number of different countries in
the group yesterday, and they are gaining a great deal from the course.
I think you have got to shoot with a rifle on specific problems,
particularly because Communist methods are changing. They are
learning from their own mistakes, and I am satisfied, myself, that the
competition between Peiping and Moscow will lead to greater effort
on the part of the two of them in order to make an impression upon
the Communist international movement.
So, sir, I do not bow to anyone in my determination to do every-
thing I can as an individual, or to sponsor anything the Government
can do, which I think contributes to the battle against communism
in the world.
Mr. Pool. If this Freedom Academy bill is passed and it becomes
a fact, what would you say would be the attitude of the State De-
partment about cooperating with the Freedom Academy ?
Mr. Harriman. Well, the State Department works for the United
States Government. There is no group of men and women in the
United States Government service that works more loyally for the
Government of the United States than the Foreign Service. They
work as loyally for Kepublicans as for Democrats. They are trained
that way. I have worked with them intimately, although I have
never been part of the Foreign Service.
I have worked intimately with the State Department Foreign Serv-
ice and I do not know any group of Americans in the United States
that is any more loyal to the decisions of the Government. Obviously,
when you are working for the Government, you have to accept deci-
sions the Government makes. You may not always agree the decisions
are a hundred percent in accordance with what you would like to see
done. But you learn, before you work very long in Government serv-
ice, that you can contribute and be loyal to the Government only if
you conform not only to the laws but also to the direction of the Presi-
dent of the United States and whomever he delegates to have charge
of the work that you are doing.
So, you need not question, need not give a moment's thought about,
the loyalty with which the State Depa.-tment will carry out laws that
are passed.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1255
Mr. Pool. Well, we must have that cooperation or there would not
be any point to passing the bill, and I appreciate what you have just
said. I think it is very commendable that the State Department has
that attitude.
Mr. Harriman. Thank you, sir.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Mr, Chairman.
Mr. Tuck. Mr. Johansen.
Mr. Johansen. I notice, Mr. Secretary, you point out that the
State Department in particular brings leaders from business, labor,
and the academic world to the Government to discuss foreign policy
problems. I notice you testified that the Department of State and
other agencies of Government produce a steady flow of pamphlets,
reports, and other educational material which is of great use to the
general public. I notice you also referred to the activities of the
Department m cooperation with the labor unions in some of the Latin
American countries and you refer to their work with youth groups.
Now, I also notice your repeated references to the fact that it is
not the business of the Federal Government to indoctrinate our citi-
zens. Mr. Secretary, what is indoctrination ?
Mr. Harkiman, Well, indoctrination, I would define it — I have not
given it the widest thought and I hope you will not try to trip me up
on it
Mr. Johansen. Nobody is trying to trip you up, Mr. Secretary.
Mr. Harkiman. Indoctrination would be that what the Communists
do is to get a gi'oup of people together and try to instill into them pre-
conceived ideas. I believe that our system in America, the strength of
our system, is freedom of discussion. To bring together a group of
private citizens of a f ormable age and attempt to indoctrinate them in
particular Government ideas and methods is improper. We do not
know who these five men running the Freedom Commission would
be. They would be five people who would decide what courses would
be given. I seriously question whether any five men should be given
the right to determine what the Government uses.
Mr. Johansen. Well, let me say, Mr. Secretary, that I know of
nothing in this bill that says that this Connnission is to engage in in-
doctrination. It is to engage in infonnation and in training regarding
Communist methods, Communist ideology, Communist goals.
I just reject the premise that the purpose of this is indoctrination.
I also reject the premise that the State Department does not ever
attempt to sell its viewpoints and its position through these various
media which you yourself testified to. I fail to see where the concept
of indoctrination gets into this discussion at all.
Mr. IIarri3Ian. Well, sir, don't you think it is quite a different thing
to bring free people of different gi'oups together here and have 50, 100.
200, or 300 sit down and spend 1 day, 2 days, sometimes a week here,
seeing everybody? They have a free discussion, they ask questions,
and there is an exchange among themselves as well as with Government
officials. They are people who are in one way or another interested in
foreign affairs.
()bviousl3^ in a democracy, foreign affairs policies must be based on
popular support, and the only way you can get that support is by or
through the normal democratic processes — the statements of the Presi-
dent, the speeches, the statements of members of the Cabinet, the state-
1256 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
ments of the Members of the Congress who are in support, and the us&
of the press, radio, and television.
But these are discussions in a most democratic way. The people are
not brought behind closed doors with a group of high-powered instruc-
tors attempting to indoctrinate them in any particular line of action.
The problems are put before them along with the manner in which the
State Department is attempting to deal with them. I find that, by and
large, the discussions are useful, and, as I have said in my testimony,
it is a two-way street. Although I think that the members of the
Foreign Service are very well versed by and large on international
affairs, they live abroad, I think contact with the American public is
one of the most important aspects of their continuing effectiveness.
Mv. JoHANSEN. Well, Mr. Secretaiy, is there any reason why in the
functioning and operations of the Freedom Academy there would not
be opportunity for free discussion and for questions and the veiy type
of process you are describing ?
Do you regard it, Mr. Secretary, as indoctrination to infonn and
document to the students of this Academy the declarations of the Com-
mmiist program and objectives, the pronouncements of Marx and
Lenin and Mr. Khrushchev as to their objectives ?
Do you regard that as indoctrination ?
Mr. Harriman. No, I do not. I have been rather advanced in the
idea. You know, there was a time when we took all Marxian works out
of all the school libraries. At least, some people attempted to do it,
and I was utterly opposed to it. I thought that there was nothing more
un-American than to censor our libraries.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Well, do you
Mr. Harriman. Let me just finish, sir. I have listened to you, sir.
I have stated vei-y strongly that I thought high schools should be
encouraged to have courses to explain to the students what the objec-
tives of communism are by teachers who understand their evil and
danger to freedom and I think that is the way to get an informed
public opinion.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Couldn't that Academy help train the teachers to
become qualified instructors in that veiy area ?
Mr. Harriman. Well, you can set up any school for the training of
teachers, but I feel it is not the United States Government's job to train
teachers in this country. I think our educational system should not
be directed by the Federal Government.
I was very strongly for Federal aid to education as Governor of the
State of New York and I know something about the educational prob-
lems of even a rich State like New York. I also think very strongly
that nothing the Federal Government could do would advance the
interests of our country more than by helping all the States, particu-
larly the States that have limited means, to improve the educational
system. But I very strongly am for not only leaving the curriculum
to the States but leaving it, as far as is practical, to the local school
boards. I think that is the strength of our democracy, sir.
And I would not be in favor of an institution which tried to train-
teachers.
Mr. JoHANSEN. I understand, and I am just anxious to get your
thinking in the thing, and appreciate it, but would you feel differently
about this Academy if it were totally a nongovernmental operation
enlisting the aid of
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1257
(At this point Mr. AYillis returned to the hearing room.)
Mr. Hawuman. No, I think it would not be a Federal Government
affair if it were attaclied to one of the great universities, or if the Gov-
ernment encouraged this type of research and this type of study in
other universities around the country. 1 would think that would be
helpful to education throughout the country.
But I would not like to see such an academy directed by the
Government.
Mr. JoHANSEN. I want to be sure I understand you, Mr. Secretary.
You would not oppose this program if it were vokmtary or if it were
connected with a university or something of that kind.
Mr. HARRiarAiS". If it was part of the general aid to institutions of
learning around the countr}^ and if it was left to the local authorities
in those institutions to develop the program.
]\Ir. JoiiANSEN. Now, I have one other question, Mr. Chairman.
Am I to understand that you think it is important to Americans and
to all free peoples to have a greater diffusion of knowledge with regard
to the literature and the ideology of the Communist leaders, such as
Lenin and Stalin and Khrushchev ?
Now, before you answer that, I ask you the question particularly
because of a statement attributed to you by Time magazine August
2 of last year, in which j^ou said, or are reported to have said — and
I will be glad to have it corrected if it is in error —
I'm not a great Kremlinologist ; I don't go off in a padded cell and read the
literature. I can't tell you what Lenin or Stalin or Khrushchev said on a given
date. But I think I have a certain feeling for the place and for what goes on.
Now, do you feel it is important that there be a thorough familiar-
ization of the free peoples and of their civilian leadership in this
country and in other free nations with the teachings and doctrines
of Lenin and Stalin and Khrushchev just as it was important, and
mifortunately was not done, that there was a full understanding of
Mein Kam-pf and what Mr. Hitler prounomiced?
Mr. Harriman. Mr. Congressman, may I comment on that state-
ment that you read from Time?
Mr. JoHANSEN. Surely.
Mr. Harriman. I recall making some statement of that kind at some
press conference or when some correspondent came and interviewed
me, and I have often said it. A fellow who is a Kremlinologist is
a man I respect very much, such as some of the university profes-
sors who are dedicating their lives to, or others conducting research
toward, a thorough understanding of the ideological developments
in Moscow and at Peiping and the differences that develop.
These studies are very important, and so is the literature the scholars
produce ; and, as far as I can, I try to keep in touch with it. But I
think I said it a little bit more humbly than I am alleged to have
spoken.
I am not a Kremlinologist. I have not spent my life trying to
analyze eveiy statement that is made and to show the detailed de-
velopments. But since the early twenties I have been very much in-
volved in a study of the Communist movement in the world. I have
a feeling for it and I think that has been the reason why I have been
right in many of the positions that I have taken, in indicating how
we ought to fight the developments of the Communist movement.
1258 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
This movement is not monolitliic. It is not rigid. It is a changing-
scene with developments, and if we attempt to deal with it in a rigid
way, we will miss the target.
Now, the other side of your question related to the question of
whether the American people should be informed about commmiism.
I feel very strongly that they should. As I have said, I have ad-
vocated— at a time when it was thought to be unwise to have even
Karl Marx's books available to students— that our high school stu-
dents should be taught by competent teachers who are opposed to
Marxist philosophy, m order that they may be able to deal with it.
But I am very much impressed, sir. I followed some of these youth
meetings, you know. There have been several in the last few years,
and our American youngsters have stacked up with the Communist-
indoctrinated yomigsters at those meetings and taken them over the
coals and, I thought, had the best of the debate.
Now, they developed that knowledge through our American free
educational system and they were not indoctrinated by the Govern-
ment, and I thought they did a job. I was very proud of them.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Well, I just want to say in conclusion that I again
reject the premise that this program calls for indoctrination. I think
it calls for the most vital form of information.
Mr. ScHADEBERG. Will the gentleman yield ?
Mr. JoHANSEN. That is all. I yield the floor.
Mr. Harriman. Well, may I simply say, I am not going to argue
about the word "indoctrination." I am just against the Federal Gov-
ernment in direct charge of the education of our people. I think that,
in our free society, education ought to be disseminated and be a re-
sponsibility which should be carried on in the American tradition, sir.
Mr. JoHANSEN. "Education," in quotes.
Mr. SoHADEBERG. Mr. Chairman, sir.
The Chairman. All right.
Mr. ScHADEBERG. I would like to make it clear, Mr, Secretary, that
it is not a matter of whether you or any other member of the State
Department or the Congress is more interested in fighting communism
than the others. I work on the premise that we are all Americans, and
we have had, and I am sure that we do have, a difference of opinion as to
how to best serve the cause of freedom. I think it is good that we
should be able to discuss it. Now, I am interested in this word "in-
doctrination." You suggest that we should not indoctrinate. Would
you not think that the Communists indoctrinate ? That the Conmiu-
nists have free discussion in their indoctrination schools ?
Mr. Harriman. No.
Mr. ScHADEBERG. They allow a discussion?
Mr. Harriman. They have a certain amount of discussion, but it is
not free in our sense. They argue about their ideology much in the
same way as it used to be in the early days of the development of
religion as to how many anglels could dance on the head of a pin.
I do not mean to be facetious about it, because I have great respect
for the religious development of our country and tlie free world and I
believe that religion is one of the strongest forces against commu-
nism. Th€y do have ideological discussions, but no one is allowed
to question the fundamental doctrme.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1259
Mr. ScHADEBERG. Woiild jou suggest, Mr. Secretaiy, that in dis-
cussing these matters or in the schools, whether it be in the Freedom
Academy or any other place, that we should not put stress on and try
to indoctrinate people for the cause of freedom?
Mr. Harriman. Well, I think it is a question of whether you are
talking about education or indoctrination. Perhaps I misused the
word "indoctrination." I haven't a dictionary here, but we generally
use it — or at least I have been accustomed to using it in terms of a
type of brainwashing. Perhaps that is too extreme — ^but I mean the
type of effort that the Communists make to impose upon their students
thought control by constant repetition, constantly keeping away from
the discussion the various other influences, and attempting to achieve
a prescribed and preconceived objective.
Our educational S3^stem has a freedom about it, and Ave do not believe
the system of indoctrination which the Soviets follow and the other
Communist states is the kind of thing that we want to adopt.
Now, on the word "indoctrination." I haven't looked it up in the
dictionary. I will be glad to submit a little memorandum on the sense
in which I use it. I do not know that we need quilDble so over a word,
because I am sure that we both have the same objective of fighting
communism. Of course, the problem is how you do it.
(Secretary Harriman's letter clarifying his use of the word "indoc-
trinate" follows:)
Undeb Secretary of State
FOR Political Affairs,
Washington, March 4, 196 'f.
The Honorable Edwin E. Willis,
Chairman, Committee on Un-American Activities,
House of Representatives.
Dear Mr. Chairman : When I testified before your committee on February 20,
I promised to clarify my use of the word "indoctrinate." I find that the Web-
ster's International Dictionary gives the following definitions :
(1) To instruct in the rudiments or principles of learning, of a branch of learn-
ing ; to instruct (in) , or imbue ( with) , as principles or doctrines ;
(2) Sometimes, in a derogatoi"y sense, to imbue with an opinion or with a
partisan or sectarian point of view.
Obviously I was using the term in the secondary dictionary sense. I think
you will agree that this is the accepted usage in international politics.
With my kind regards.
Sincerely,
/s/ W. Averell Harriman,
W. Averell Harriman.
Mr. ScHADEBERG. I liavB uo doubt of that, Mr. Secretary, but
Mr, Harriman. And the question is whether you have a place
where there is concentrated attention, in the Federal Government, or
whether you leave the job of education of our public to the non-
Federal educational system.
Now, when it comes to educating the servants of the American
Government, the people who work for it in the field of foreign affairs,
why, I believe that tliere should be instruction in fighting commu-
nism.
I also believe that we should do all we can, and we are doing it in
many ways, through our AID organization and in many other ways.
Through our embassies and in other ways, we are atternpting to
bring the right kind of infonnation to the people of foreign coun-
1260 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
tries. We do this through our USIA and through special courses of
training; for example, as I mentioned, training police officials who
have the responsibility for developing a police system which not only
can keep law and order in a democracy, but also can rout out the
rats that are involved in the subversive activity in these coimtries.
Now^, these are hitting the problem with a rifle shot rather than a
shotgun blast. What I don't like about this bill is the general ap-
proach to try to have the Federal Government — I don't know a better
word than indoctrinate — but try to get the Federal Government to
enter the held of education. I would much prefer to see the energies
of the Government develop the right kind of education for those who
work for the Govermiient, both on the civilian and the military end,
and also to contribute to our educational system so that it may give a
rounded education in the whole range of subjects which will produce
effective citizens.
I earnestly believe, sir, as you do, that a knowledge of communism
is an important aspect of the education of young people and is an
important part of the training that they need in order to understand
the problems of the day.
Mr. ScHADEBERG. Where we may have a little difference of opin-
ion is the fact that if we consider the hot war as a means by which
the Government — as you say, the police, it would be military — teaches
them how to use the tools in fighting a hot war, are not ideas weapons
in the hands of people to fight the cold war ?
And why should we not also have an opportunity to teach these, to
put these tools in the liands of our people ?
Mr. Harriman. I would rather see it, sir, done by a normal educa-
tional institution, rather than of a special Academy here to teach our
American youth.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Who is going to train the teachers?
Mr. Harriman. Well, we have universities that have extremely
good departments which are extremely well versed in eveiy aspect of
Communist activity in the Soviet Union and other countries. The
trainmg of teachers in communism can be readily achieved through
existing institutions, particularly if those institutions are given
enough money to expand their activities in all fields of education.
Mr. Schadeiberg. I would like to make this one comment, Mr. Chair-
man, for the record, and that is that it seems to me — and, of course, I
am a layman in this, too — that one of our failures in fighting effectively
against conunmiism is that we, under the guise of so-called tolerance
or academic freedom or whatever you want to call it, that we give
communism equal status with freedom and I think that communism
does not have it.
They say that Leninism, the Marxist state is certainly a superior
state. I cannot personally see anything wrong in saying that freedom
is right and it has a greater status than Marxism.
Mr. Harrimaist. I hope I was responding to what Congressman
Johansen was saying. Obviously, we do not want to teach communism
as a virtue. We want to expose it in our educational system. But you
know, it is an interesting thing. I believe I am right in saying that
the educational system in Russia has failed in one of its most important
objectives. We have got to recognize it has been extraordinarily effec-
tive in taking a nation that in 1917 was 80 or 85 percent illiterate and
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1261
educating the people so there is now a veiy low rate of illiteracy in the
Soviet Union. They have developed, as you know, very skillful sci-
entists and technicians, but with it all, throughout all that system, they
practice indoctrination of the Communist ideology and that is ham-
mered, hammered, hammered, into the youth.
And it was supposed to be that when this new generation emerged,
it would be so indoctrinated with communism that it would be amen-
able to the leaders. Now, I am told — I cannot give you convincing
evidence — that among the universities there are, of course, certain
people who are very, very vigorous Communists, but that the rank
and file of the students are interested in the broad educational subjects.
They want to have the freest kind of discussion. They resent the fact
that books from the free world are not available, that they are not able
to write as they wish and discuss things as they wish. And above
all, as I say, they want to travel. Now, this is the type of indoc-
trination that I think is a failure.
Now, I think our freedom, freedom itself, use of the free system,
is the way to convince people that that is the proper system to be
adopted. But I have been constantly fighting what some people call
"taking on the face of the enemy," adopting the methods of total-
itarianism in order to fight totalitarianism.
Mr. ScHADEBERG. Well, I would agree with vou, Mr. Secretary, on
that.
Mr. Harriman. I w^ould hope that this committee could concentrate
on ways and means to help our general educational system reach all
of the people in our country and have them understand communism.
I do not think that there would be such opposition to foreign aid if
the people understood where the Communist movement was going.
Wlien I was in Moscow in 1945, I reported to the Government, to
the President of the United States, that I did not think UNERA
was enough. I said Stalin would take over Western Europe if we did
not give the people living there in the chaos of the postwar period
a chance to have working capital to buy raw materials and get their
factories moving.
I did not realize at that time, of course, that the Marshall plan
would be as ambitious a program as it was, or that we would go on
and develop NATO, but I did point out that Stalin wanted to take
over Western Europe. In my opinion, if it had not been for the
Marshall plan and NATO, Western Europe would be dominated by
communism today, just as Eastern Europe is.
We were successful in turning Stalin back. Now it is perfectly
plain from what Mr. Khiiishchev says that the new battle against
communism is in the undeveloped countries. And yet there are strong
opinions held by people in some quarters, including Capitol Hill, that
our foreign aid program is not the way to fight communism. Well,
I believe it is, and I think that should be stated very firmly and
definitely.
It is not the only thing. Our political policies, the way we treat our
friends and allies around the world, our information service, the
manner in which we exchange students — the way we bring them
over here and how we deal with them, are vitally important. But
unless the people of the world can get some improvement of their
1262 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
lot, can move toward freedom, there is an evidence that they will
turn to the false promises of communism.
I would like to see the widest discussion of the foreign aid pro-
gram and what its objectives are, and I would hope that this com-
mittee would see that there was wider discussion of the program.
I would be very glad to testify before the Un-American Activities
Committee and discuss what countries should get support for the
battle against communism, in which I have been involved since 1945.
The Chairman. Well, Mr. Secretary, I am sorry I had to be
away when you appeared — and I apologize for that — so I cannot
undertake too much examination on your statement, which I did
not hear. But two questions occur to me. I have been impressed
and have listened carefully to your argument against indoctrination.
Actually, I have before me here the bill we are considering and
also the National Academy of Foreign Affairs proposal introduced
by Mr. Hays, on request, which is known as H.R. 3668. The
bill we are considering contains the language that the Conunission
"shall establish under its supervision and control an advanced re-
search, development, and training center."
The language of the National Academy of Foreign Affairs bill
provides for "the establishment of an institution at which training,
education, and research * * * may be undertaken."
I do not find such vast difference in language. Why would one be
indoctrination, using the term as you have used it, and the other
not?
Mr. Harriman. I do not fully understand your question, sir. I
am a little bit deaf, sir, and so I did not quite hear your question ; but
if I understood it correctly, the National Academy which has been
proposed is the result of a very prominent group of people studying
the need for it. Dr. James A. Perkins was chairman of the group.
He was with the Carnegie Foundation and now is the president of
Cornell. A committee headed by former Secretary of State Herter
made similar recommendations. The National Academy of Foreign
Affairs, which the Perkins and Herter committees and the administra-
tion proposed, we believe, is the best place to carry on research and to
concentrate on training those people working for the Government
who have contact with international problems.
The Chairman. Well, my question was why, from any point of
view, would one be indoctrination and the other not, when . the
language in the two bills is practically the same ?
Mr. Harriman. Well, this is a question of indoctrination of the
public, rather than taking mature people and training them to deal
with the problems that our Government faces m its relations abroad.
The manner in which we can concentrate our research in this
Academy would be of greater value. They would have access to
classified material. They could study the past mistakes and the past
successes and what can be achieved.
The Chapman. But that would be indoctrination, though, in the
same context; would it not?
Mr. Harriman. Wliat ?
The Chairman. My question still remains the same: Wliy, the
language of the bills being practically the same, can it be said that,
under one approach, we would have indoctrination and, under the
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1263
other, we would not? I do not think you have faced that issue. I
am not pressing you, you understand.
Mr. Harriman. Well, before you came in. Chairman Willis, we
had an interesting, perhaps academic, discussion of the meaning
of the word "indoctrination." I was using the word "indoctrmation"
in the form in which the Communists attempt to indoctrinate their
people. That I think we all understand.
They indoctrinate their people. Maybe the word "indoctrination"
is the wrong one, but, sir, we believe that to achieve the objectives
that you have in mind, one of the steps is to support the proposal
for a National Academy of Foreign Affairs.
Now, that is not the only answer. It is only one more of the po-
tential activities of the Government, and I think there are other activ-
ities of Government which could help the educational system of our
country. But I would not like to see private citizens brought here
in large groups to deal with communism as one subject at an Academy
bemg run by five men who are not part of the Government machinery.
And I would much prefer to see our educational system of the public
be left in the hands, as it now is, of the local authorities.
The Chairman. Well, of course, what you say there is incon-
testible. I have not been an advocate of even Federal aid to educa-
tion, so I am not in disagreement with you on that.
Mr. Harriman. I am, sir, if I may say so. I am very strongly for
Federal aid to education.
The Chairman. I know, and I also vote for a lot of things that
you are probably for, too.
Mr. Harriman. I respect your views.
The Chairman. But I was trying to find out, very honestly, in m n-
swer to the second question: Why could one be characterized and
labeled "indoctrination" and not the other?
Mr. Harriman. Well, shall we drop the word "indoctrination" and
try to paraphrase it ? I feel that the education and training of Govern-
ment employees is a perfectly appropriate function. We have military
men who train experts in their field and we should have civilian per-
sonnel in our Government trained in all aspects of our foreign prob-
lems and particularly with the most important of all, which is how
to deal with the cold war.
The Chairman. Well, let me say, sir
Mr. Harriman. But the other question is, as I understand the pro-
posal, the emphasis on the Government's getting into the business of
educating private citizens. And that is what I am expressing opposi-
tion to.
The Chairman. Yes, I understand, and a while ago you used the
words "people of maturity" as compared to those of immaturity. I
do not know that that is justified, but I am quite sure at least the intent
of the authors of these bills is to use quite mature people as a student
body.
Mr. Harriman. When I was 17 years old, I thought I was mature,
so perhaps we had better not go into that.
The Chairman. But you see, you have been using the word "stu-
dents." I think we should talk about participants. Those could be
very mature — labor leaders, management, professionals. We are not
talking about high school students or even college students in the
sense that I think you have been referring to them.
1264 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
Mr. Harriman. Mr. Chairman, I did not come here to attempt to
score debating points on members of the committee and I don't care
whether debating points are scored on me, as long as I can attempt to
get across what my basic convictions are.
I think the National Academy, as contemplated by the proposed
legislation which was the resnlt of a studious group, would be an im-
portant addition to our training of men — and when I use the word
"mature," I am talking about men in the middle of their careers — in
making them more effective in this fight.
There are other things that should be done, other educational activi-
ties which should be expanded, but I do not agree w^ith the idea that
it is the Government's job to bring in private citizens and have them
trained by — let's forget the word "indoctrinated" — trained by a Com-
mission which is not responsible to our Government, nor is it respon-
sible to the local communities.
The Chairman. I want you to understand, sir, that I am not an
author of the bill. I am trying to get the facts. My mind is com-
pletely open on this proposal.
May I suggest this? Would it remove any of your opposition if the
student body would be limited to Government employees and foreign
nationals ?
Mr. Harriman. Well, I think the Government employees can be
better dealt with through the proposal that we have made, that has
been made after a considerable study by distinguished citizens who
are skilled in education, including the former Secretary of State, Mr.
Herter. I think that it is a better formula. I think that manj^ of the
objectives as described in the Freedom Academy bills are more or
less parallel with the objectives that are specified for the National
Academy of Foreign Affaire, so it is a question of machinery. And
I think that the general setup, the manner in which the National
Academy of Foreign Affairs would be operated, is wiser than the
setup that is proposed by these four bills, all of which, I under-
stand, provide for an independent group.
Mr. Ichord. Will the chairman yield ?
The Chairman. Well, I understand your views. I am not debat-
ing. I just want to read from the record — since you included a num-
ber of people Avho played a part in the formulation and final language
of the National Academy approach — the authors, on the Senate side,
of one of these Freedom Academy bills. They cut across political
lines and their views toward foreign aid obviously vary.
For instance, among the authors are Senators Mundt, Douglas, Case,
Dodd, Smathers, Goldwater, Proxmire, Fong, Hickenlooper, Miller,
Keating, Lausche, and Scott.
So there is quite an array of responsible ])eople behind this ap-
proach, too. And I myself do not want to belabor the point, Mr.
Secretary, or debate with you or cross-examine you. I just wanted
to have these facts in the record.
Mr. IcHORD. Will the chairman yield for a question on that ?
Mr. Harj^iman. Mr. Chairman, may I bring out the fact that
the bill which the Department has testified in favor of is proposed
also by a cross section of members of both parties. May I read them,
sir?
PROVIDESTG FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1265
The Chairman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Harriman. Mr. Syming-ton, Mr. Saltonstall, Mr. Bayh, Mr.
Boggs, Mr. Byrd of West Virginia, Mr. Clark, Mr. Engle, Mr. Gruen-
ing, Mr. Humphrey, Mr. Inouye, Mr. Long of Missouri, Mr. Mansfield,
Mr. McGee, Mr. Moss, Mrs. Neuberger, Mr. Kandolph, Mr. Kibicoff,
Mr. Smathers, Mr. Williams of New Jersey, Mr. Yarborough, Mr.
Monroney, Mr. Fong, Mr. Hart, Mr. Mclntyre, Mr. Brewster, Mr.
Javits, and Mr. Camion.
The Chairman. It looks like Mr. Smathers is on both sides, which
shows, I suppose, that we are all trying to get at the same thing.
And that is why we are having these hearings — to get at it.
Mr. Harriman. Yes. Of course, sir, I came here to express my
strong belief that this committee can make a contribution to this
all-important question, and I only hope that it will direct its efforts
in the direction which I think will be most effective. But it is up to
this committee, in its wisdom, to decide what it wants to recommend ;
and as I had testified before you came in, the State Department will
conform to, and work with, whatever Congress passes and the Presi-
dent approves.
Mr. IcHORD. Would the chairman yield for a question on that point ?
The Chairman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Ichord. As to the matter of why the Secretary thinks one would
be indoctrination and the other would not be, I would like to point out
that on page 7 of the National Academy of Foreign Affairs bill, there
is also permitted the authority to — subsection (c) reads on page 7,
line 16, "permit other persons, including individuals who are not
citizens of the United States, to receive training or education or to
perform research at the Academy," so apparently the National Acad-
emy of Foreign Affairs would also permit the training of private
citizens as well as foreign nationals.
Mr. Harriman. Yes, sir.
Mr. IcHORD. So I do not see
Mr. Harriman. Yes, sir, that is true. In our National War Col-
leges— as you know, we have six War Colleges — we have carefully
selected the men from other countries who would gain by the partici-
pation. At the National Academy, presumably, there would be care-
fully selected foreign personnel who would profit from the general
education.
Mr. IcHORD. Then I take it the objection
Mr. Harriman. Now, may I say that the National Academ^^ would
be primarily for Government employees and not for private citizens in
large numbers, whereas I understood that under the Freedom Academy
proposal there would be very large numbers of private citizens from all
countries. The bill we have been supporting would relate to Govern-
ment employees and would make it possible, therefore, to deal with
classified material.
Mr. IcHORD. Then I take it the objection of the Secretary is to who
is going to nm the Academy, or the Academy of Foreign Affairs,
rather than the training. You yourself would object to the training
of private citizens in large numbers.
Mr, Harriman. In large numbers, yes. I would rather leave it to
the States, to our normal educational system. You know, there was
a general impression at one time after the war that it was a mistake to
1266 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COAIMISSION
let any young people read Karl Marx or any literature that related to
communism. I am glad to see that that idea is waning and that it is
now recog-nized as important for the young people of our country to
imderstand the Commmiist menace by becoming more familiar with it.
Mr. IcHORD. Well, I would point out to the Secretary, Mr. Chairman,
that under the terms of the Boggs bill and the Taft bill and one of the
other bills only foreig-n nationals would be admitted that have been
approved by the Secretary of State.
Mr. Harriman. That is correct. And carefully screened.
Similarly, we have six military colleges, specializing on different
problems, and all of them have a certain number of carefully selected
foreign officers and also nonmilitary Government officers.
Mr. Pool. Mr. Chairman, I have one question.
The Chairman-. All right.
Mr. Pool. Was the National Academy bill that you are in favor of
proposed after the Freedom Academy idea first came forth ?
Mr. Harriman. Well, I have forgotten how long ago it started, but
I do know that this committee that Dr. Perkins was chairman of
worked for several months. There was another committee which
former Secretary Herter was chairman of. The idea has been studied
over quite a number of years, but I can't tell you for exactly how long.
I will be glad to find out just when these studies in the State Depart-
ment began and put it in the record.
(The information furnished by Secretary Harriman follows:)
The State Department subsequently reported that plans for creation of a
National Academy of Foreign Affairs to improve upon and supersede the Foreign
Service Institute were first formalized early in 1962. The President's Advisory
Panel on a National Academy of Foreign Affairs headed by Dr. James A. Perkins
was created in June 1962. Dr. Perkins' panel submitted its report to President
Kennedy on December 17, 1962.
The Committee on Foreign Affairs Personnel, of which Secretary Herter was
chairman, was established in August 1961. The Committee submitted its report
to the Secretary of State in December 1962.
Mr. Harriman. Incidentally, the State Department has today a less
adequate form of trying to achieve the same objective in its present
Foreign Service Institute. We have also a brief course for senior
officers and middle-level officers, specifically in counterinsurgency. It
lasts 4 to 5 weeks. I have spoken to it on four or five occasions and
have followed it very carefully. That is a new, more recent addition
to the training. They concentrate on countersubversion, believing
that that activity is increasing in a number of the underde\^eloped
coimtries and that our Foreign Service officers should be thoroughly
schooled and trained in that field.
This Institute includes officers from the Military Establishment as
well as officers from the State Department, from AID and USIA,
all those that are involved in the cold war in the field.
Mr. Pool. The point has been made that
Mr. Harriman. And these are courses that go on, sir, month after
month, with TO to 90 officers at a time taking those courses. _ It is very
effective, I think, and a useful addition to the normal training they
have had, bringing them up to date with the changing Communist
methods and the changing Communist scene.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1267
Mr. Pool. The point has been made that the National Academy bill
was introduced as a defensive way of fighting this Freedom Academy
bill. Do you have any comment on that ?
Mr. Harpjman. I wouldn't think that was true at all, sir. I think
it was a development over a period of years which finally found its
shape in this bill which was introduced by the members of the Senate
and House that I mentioned.
The Chairman. May I ask one final question, sir? Because I do
not know what direction this committee will go in the handling of
this legislation.
The Freedom Academy bill, as you probably know, contains provi-
sion for an Advisory Committee to the Academy, and that Advisory
Committee would be composed of a representative of the Department
of State ; the Department of Defense ; the Department of Health, Edu-
cation, and Welfare; the Central Intelligence Agency; the Federal
Bureau of Investigation; the Agency for International Development;
and the United States Information Agency. And it goes on to provide
that this Advisory Committee will itself have a chairman and meet
periodically with the Commission, and make recommendations and
consult with the Commission, and I paraphrase the bill, with regard to
plans, programs, and activities of the Commission, and so on. That,
at least, is a good provision ; is it not ?
Do you feel that we have to go in that direction? Could you en-
large on that, perhaps? Would that be a proper linkage with the
Federal Government, I mean, the State Department, and so on ? Be-
cause the very purpose of the Advisory Committee, as stated in that
section, is "to assure effective cooperation between the Freedom Acad-
emy and various Government agencies concerned with its objectives."
Mr. Harriman. Well, I am opposed to the purpose of the Freedom
Academy. Therefore, I do not think that it is wise for any of these
agencies of Government to be involved in the education of large masses
of private citizens. It is appropriate for them to control the educa-
tion of those in Government service, but I do not think it is appropri-
ate for a Federal Government body to control the education of masses
of private American citizens.
The Chairman. Any questions ?
Mr. IcHORD. Yes, Mr. Chairman, I have several questions.
Mr. Secretary, when this bill was first brought to my attention, I was
inclined to be against it because I thought it was not necessary, that
there would be overlapping of duties and duplication of functions
with the State Department, but after hearing the testimony, I have
changed my mind.
Now, have you had the opportunity to read the statement of Mr.
Grant, a charter member of the Orlando Committee, who originated
the idea of the Freedom Academy and who testified before the com-
mittee Tuesday, I believe ?
Mr. Harriman. No, I haven't had that privilege. I don't know
who Mr. Grant is.
Mr. IcHORD. Well, Mr. Grant, in his statement to the committee,
referred to a speech made by Senator Yomig of Ohio last September,
who had the same idea that I had when this bill was originally pre-
sented to me. Senator Young in his speech pointed out that we
already had a Foreign Service Institute, five War Colleges, a Special
1268 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
Warfare School at Fort Bragg, and a Russian Research Center at
Harvard, and various otlier areas of study at universities, so he asked
the question : Why do we need a Freedom Academy ?
Then Mr. Grant in his statement pointed out that the committee
made a study of the training offered in these various institutions and
he made what I consider several serious charges against the training
that is provided in these institutions, and I think these charges should
be presented to you and you given a chance to answer the same in
the record.
First of all, he stated that the Orlando Committee found, No. 1 : "In
general, the training, especially as it deals with nonmilitary conflict,
tends to be skimpy, superficial, or nonexistent and provides the stu-
dent with little motivation."
I would like to have you comment upon that statement, Mr. Secre-
tary, if you would, please.
Mr. Harriman. Well, Mr. Congressman, I haven't had the oppor-
tunity to read this, it is just in my hand now. I wouldn't want to
comment about it. This is a free countiy, everybody has got a right
to express his opinions, and I applaud Mr. Alan G. Grant, attorney
at law, of Orlando, Florida, who is interested in this very important
subject of battling the cold war. I applaud all private citizens' inter-
est in it. I just don't happen to believe that his judgment in this
thing is right, really.
I am entitled to my opinion, sir, as well as he his, but I don't know
what particular expertise Mr. Grant has. I have no knowledge of
who he is or what he is and I don't think he has had the experience,
for instance, of either former Secretary of State Herter or Dr. Perkins,
who was the head of the Carnegie Foundation and now is president of
a very great university in my State, the State of New York.
Mr. loHORD. Mr. Secretary, I am just trj^in^ to get enough facts
on which I can base what I think to be a valid judgment of the legis-
lation, but you indicated in your statement that you thought that the
Freedom Academy would be considering communism in a vacuum.
As I read the various bills, I think that they will offer a broad
spectrum training in foreign affairs, but will also concentrate on
nonmilitary conflict. I believe that the Freedom Academy bill covers
everything that the National Academy of Foreign Affairs bill covers
and a little more. But Mr. Grant states that the committee was unable
to find a single Government or university training 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, and certainly I think we should have institutions where
the availability of study in those things is there and it is very im-
portant that we study Commimists' warfare, political warfare, and
insurgency, and the means of defeating it.
I hope that that statement is not justified.
Mr. Harriman. If that is the statement he makes — I haven't had the
privilege of reading it — I don't agree with him. I have spoken to
each one of the six of our militaiy colleges. I know in a general way
what their curriculum is and all of them, in addition to what their
particular activity may be in training for combat, are also involved
in the general aspect of the cold war and how to deal with specific
subjects. As a matter of fact, the talks that I have given at tlie War
Colleges were in that field of the cold war.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1269
We also, as I said, have a training course of 4 or 5 weeks, specifically
directed at counterinsurgency. Communist insurgency is one aspect
of the conflict.
Now, the point that I think perhaps Mr. Grant doesn't realize is
that to do real research and to have real discussions you have to have
access to classified material. Now the Freedom Academy couldn't
have access to classified material because it would not include Govern-
ment employees. It would be, I gather, 10,000 or so private citizens,
and classified material would not be available to them.
I believe that a more concentrated course in how to fight and carry
on and win the cold war — incidentally, I think we are winning it —
can better be done by training Government officers and leave the gen-
eral training of private citizens to our universities.
You speak of Harvard University. I know I have spoken at many
of the universities in our country. I am very much encouraged to
find that there are an increasing number of institutions of learning
that are giving very great attention to the subjects which would be
covered by the Freedom Academy and I think it is better done that
way. I think the Government should train its own employees and
bring to its own school Government employees, either military or non-
military, as it sees fit. We have found that selected foreign students
who have come here have been very well trained and have gone home,
in most cases, weU inspired by our methods in tliis country. But I
think the general public from abroad should be allowed to have access
to all of our nongovernmental institutions of learning. Some 50,000
foreign students are here in the country.
I think our institutions of learning are improving all the time in
the manner in which they attempt to give the foreign student the
maximum value in the period of his studies in this country.
I would not like to see it publicized in the world that the United
States Government had a Government institution for the pui-pose of
training great numbers of foreign students. I fully agree with Chair-
man Willis that our private institutions and our State institutions
should carry on the general educational work in our country.
If this committee wants to encourage our private institutions or
feels that it is wise to do that, I would welcome it. I would also wel-
come including in the support for education the encouragement of the
whole area of study of Communist activity. Communist philosophy,
and manner in which to deal with communism. But I earnestly be-
lieve that it is better in our American system to leave that education
to our private institutions, sir. And I would hope that you would
encourage the Government to round out and expand its activities not
only in the United States, but through the various means that we now
have of encouraging the training and education in free countries which
are our friends and allies.
Mr. IcHORD. You have objected to the training of private citizens
in large numbers in an Academy of this sort. Has the State Depart-
ment made any study of the role that private citizens could be play-
ing in helping to solve our local problems ?
Mr. IL\RRiMAN. I don't know that the State Department has ever
had a project, or money for a project, to study or make a complete
study of what is done in this field. If the Congress directed the
Department to do it, I think it would be a very healthy thing. But
30-471— 64^-pt. 2 3
1270 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
I do know that the State Department is, in one way or another, in very
close touch with many of the universities and colleges that are particu-
larly interested in foreign affairs, and particularly interested in the
subject which is being directly discussed now. Members of the State
Department staff do go and lecture to them, and we ask the universities
to come down and consider with us projects which are important. In
fact, some of the officers of the Department are drawn from the uni-
versities, and they come and work for the Government and then they
go back to their academic fields. It is stimulating to the academic
field. But I don't know of any study. If there is one I will let you
know, sir. If this committee wishes such a study to be made, I am
sure the State Department would be only too glad to do so, and it
might be of use and illuminating to all of us. I am not sure whether
the Perkins committee made such a study.
Mr. IcHORD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Harriman. May I just say, sir, that I am very heartily in sym-
pathy with the idea that more knowledge should be disseminated in our
country, that more people should be stimulated to study and under-
stand, and that those in our Government who are charged with carry-
ing out our policy and conducting the battle that is going on — both
militarily, unfortunately, in some areas of the world, but also on a
civilian basis — should have more education. I say again that, al-
though we are having setbacks, fundamentally and as I have watched
the world develop since 1945, gravely concerned about Communist
takeover, I think we are by way of winning the cold war. If we con-
tinue to have the determination which increasingly our people are
showing and the stimulation this committee is giving, I hope will con-
tribute to that.
Mr. IcHORD. Well, I might say, Mr. Secretary, that the only differ-
ence that I see in these two proposals is that the Academy, Freedom
Academy, j)uts emphasis upon the training of private citizens, both of
them permit the training of foreign nationals, even the Academy of
Foreign Affairs permits the training of private citizens. However,
you have objected to them, in training in large numbers, and the Free-
dom Academy does permit the establishment of an information center,
which you are opposed to. But really, I think your opposition, other
than the information center and the training of private citizens in
large numbers, goes to the fact as to M'ho is to run the institution.
You feel that it should be run by the Department of State, while the
sponsors of the bills want an independent agency.
Mr. Harriman. Well, sir, I am afraid the word "only" is rather a
broad word. It covers quite a considerable area.
The objectives of the two bills, as you read the preambles, appear to
be generally in agreement, but the methods are quite different.
Mr. ScHADEBERG. Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Yes, sir.
Mr. ScHADEBERG. I would like to thank the Secretary for being
here. I know it has been helpful for me, at least, but in view of the
fact that the Secretary has commented several times on the fact that
he thought that we ought not to burn books on Marxism and com-
munism and so forth, and I agree with him, I would like at least to be
on the record that I have always contended that we ought to teach
about communism.
PROVIDING FOR CIJKATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1271
Mr. Harriman. Good.
Mr. ScHADEBERG. But I would feel that I would like to see it taught
by professors who are oriented toward freedom and a free society and
not oriented toward the Marxist way.
Mr. Harriman. That is one statement, sir, that I agi'ee with 1,000
percent.
The CHAiRMAisr. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary. We ap-
preciate your appearance.
Mr. Harriman. Thank you. I am grateful to you, Ciiairman Willis,
for the privilege of appearing.
The Chairman. Let me make a suggestion that you might counsel
with your aide, here. Would yoa care to offer a rebuttal, explanation,
or enlargement on what you had to say, vis-a-vis the criticisms by
Mr. Grant, of the Foreign Service Institute and the War Colleges?
Mr. Harriman. If I may take this copy, I would be very glad
to take it and I would be very glad to
The Chairman. I am not asking for it. 1 said perhaps you might
care to do this.
We want a record as complete as possible.
Mr. Harriman. Could I read it first, sir, and then see whether
we are ready to take up your very courteous offer 'I It is a question
of making a general comment on it or a detailed comment on it.
I think that depends upon it. We have to read it first.^
The Chairman. Yes, sir.
Mr, Harriman. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I wish
you well in your objectives.
The Chairman. Thank you.
I think one of our colleagues is here.
Mr. Taft? Glad to have you, sir.
STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT TAPT, JR., U.S. REPRESENTATIVE
FROM OHIO
Mr. Tapt. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the commit-
tee. I shall not take long for this statement. I realize that the com-
mittee has heard a great deal about this subject. I am sure that many
members are more familiar with the background of the proposal than
I am.
I gave this bill some study before introducing it and I have listened
with great interest to the testimony of Secretary Harriman here
this morning.
My interest in sponsorship arises from the conviction that we are
engaged in an ideological battle for the minds of men that is bound
to determine the future course of this country and of mankind. While
the basic differences between our system and the Communist systeipi
(the contrast of individual freedom and responsibility, as compared
to authoritarian direction and submission) may be clear to all Ame^^-
cans (I am not so much worried about the matter of indoctrinatiqn
that has been discussed here this morning, because I feel that most
Americans do not need indoctrination in knowing which direction. t]p,ey
want to go), I am concerned with laying bare and exposing soni;^,pf
* No further communication was received from Mr. Harriman on this point.
1272 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
the techniques, methods, and stratagems that have been developed
in spreading communism. These are extremely complex and extremely
subtle and have not been adequately revealed. I think the record of
progress in recent years for Communist ideology in much of the
world stands as mute but mighty testimony to our lag in these areas,
despite the superiority of military force that we have held and
despite our complete conviction, I am sure, that our system offers
far more to mankind.
I do think that a few points might be specifically examined by the
committee in the determination as to what direction it may want to
go on the various proposals that are before it. I don't say that either
one of these proposals, mine or the National Academy as proposed by
the Secretary, or others, are the only answers, but I think certain
things should be considered and taken into consideration as back-
ground for the decision that you are going to be called upon to make.
First of all, I think we have to admit that the need for some activity
in this area is pretty clear. Recent history, I think, shows the spread
of Communist subversion and our complete failure to check the in-
creased growth of Communist subversion, and its effect evidenced in
many areas of the world is in itself enough to prove this.
Secondly, I think we have to recognize that research as well as train-
ing is vitally important. Of course, national security provisions must
be observed, but there are many governmental functions and activities
to which security provisions offer no complications. A public body
has the advantage of ready access to the information necessary to do
the job. Our private universities may attempt to get this kind of
information, they may attempt to draw conclusions from it, but in
the last analysis they don't have the same access. There are some
notable exceptions in specific areas. The Hoover Institution, for in-
stance, out in California, is doing a wonderful job of getting basic raw
material in this area, and in the entire area beyond this, of the whole
nature of revolution.
But I think that there is a real need for governmental activity here.
I think next we have to recognize that it must not be — it must not
be — partisan, and it must not be a witch hunt by any particular group
of one sort or another. I think that would certainly defeat the pur-
pose of it very quickly. But I think, therefore, that having a bipar-
tisan Commission (not having it under any particular department of
the Government) offers a great deal more hope for the chances of suc-
cess than having it under the Secretary of State or having it under
anyone else. I think we have to face the fact that private universities
and existing public bodies have not been able to do the job. The
record is such that I think this is clear.
I think that we also have to admit that in a very real sense, perhaps
not broadly through their people, but in the very real sense of having
a real trained cadre or core of subversives, that the Communists have
been doing this job. I do not think we have to adopt their methods to
succeed or to oppose them ; I think we can develop our own methods
consistent with our ideas of freedom and of proper activity.
Finally, I think that this area of private concerns and private indi-
viduals is extremely important. It is becoming more important all the
time.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1273
I have had a few connections in the past with American organiza-
tions doing business overseas. Many of those organizations very
frankly simply will not deal through the regular American channels,
the American State Department representatives. They say they are
only a handicap. They are no help. These organizations, many of
them, are not called upon, ever, by the State Department or by anyone
in Government for the information that they do have available. This
is becoming more and more true for the information that is available,
I think, is becoming broader all the time. For instance, we have the
whole question of trade fairs. We have had Americans going into
joint trade fairs in Europe, that some of you gentlemen may know
about. We have sent over private citizens who have not been trained
as to what the problems may be. I think they should have been trained,
and the enactment of my bill would see that such training was
provided.
I think the same thing is true of many joint ventures. We find
many nations now require a certain amount of stock ownership among
nationals in those particular countries. (This is true in many Latin
American comitries, and the contacts that we are making here and
the problems of Communist subversion ui those nations are vital to
these businesses.) If U.S. businessmen are going to invest in those
areas, they are going to have to be arriving at conclusions, anyway.
But are they going to be arriving at sound conclusions in making the
decisions that will affect what happens to America in these areas?
I cannot share with the Secretary the idea he has that clearance
is a real problem, and security is a matter here that is of great, great
importance. I do not think that any of us really believe that the
Freedom Academy proposal is to train the broad mass of people in
this country; it is to train people who are directly concerned here
and who can take an important part in it, and many of these are
private individuals, many of them have security clearances, as you
know.
The military continuously is taking civilians on indoctrination trips,
giving them security clearance before they do it.
The same thing, it seems to me, could be true here.
These are just a few of the ideas that I have.
The information center proposal is, of course, a little controversial,
but I would point out to you that we are doing exactly the same
thing overseas with USIA.
I would point out to you also that insofar as, for instance, EOTC
courses or the FBI school, agricultural extension colleges, various War
Colleges, I am sure that we are presently preparing textbook informa-
tion and other basic information, where the Government is the only
body that has the proper information for preparation for these courses,
and that would be true here. There is nothing compulsory in this
bill compelling anyone to use the information that is prepared. It
is merely an authorization to prepare the information, so that if
some group wants to use it, and it is proper for them to use it, it will
be available.
These are some of my views, and I would just like to conclude by
saying that I strongly agree with the position that has been taken
by Congressman Schweiker. I feel that it is extremely important
that this committee report out a bill and get us moving toward the
1274 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
solution of these problems. The bill won't be perfect. No bill, the
first time around, ever is. It may not even succeed. But at least we
will know that we have taken a shot at it and tried.
Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Mr. SoHADEBERG. I have no questions.
Mr. Tuck. Mr. Chairman, I would like to commend the distin-
guished gentleman from Ohio for making such a fine statement.
As I understand it from your testimony, this is not a matter of
ideology as it is informing the people as to methods by which the
Communists undertake to infiltrate this and other countries.
Mr. Taft. That is my feeling. Governor Tuck.
Mr. Tuck. And that people would be left free to enjoy the ideologies
which they already have.
Mr. Taft. Yes, indeed. I do not think this is an attempt to
The Chairman. Indoctrinate?
Mr. Taft. — indoctrinate, or propagandize I think was the word I
was looking for, Mr. Chairman, the American people in any sense.
Mr. Tuck. I take it also from your testimony that you believe —
which undoubtedly is true — that private and State universities and
schools do not have the means to supply the information which it is
necessary for them to have in order to train teachers and others who
are engaged in educational work.
Mr. Taft. That is my feeling.
Mr. Tuck. That is all.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, sir.
Is Dr. Niemeyer with us?
Dr. Niemeyer. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Off the record.
(Discussion off the record.)
The Chairman. Proceed, Dr. Niemeyer.
STATEMENT OF GEUHAUT NIEMEYER
Dr. NiEMETER. Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee : This bill
proposes a new agency for research and training in order to enhance
the political warfare capabilities of the free world.
The Chairman. Mr. Niemeyer, may I interrupt?
I wonder if you could give a thumbnail sketch of your background
for the record.
Dr. Niemeyer. Indeed. I am professor
The Chairman. I have something here handed to me. Let^ me
read it and see. Well, give it in your own words, in thumbnail fashion ;
will you?
Dr. Niemeyer. I am a professor of political science at Notre Dame,
one time member of the State Department, one time member of the
faculty of the National War College, and one time consultant to your
committee, sir.
The Chairman. Yes, I know. Didn't you also teach at Princeton ?
Dr. Niemeyer. Indeed. At Yale, a1 Columbia University, at Ogle-
thorpe University.
The Chairman. Well, I think you are tlie autJior of a book entitled
An Inquiry Into Soviet Mentality?
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1275
Dr. NiEMEYER. Right.
The Chairman. And I think you collaborated with our committee
in connection with a volume put out, Facts on G ommnMnisvif
Dr. NiEiviEYER. Right. Also editor of A Handbook on Convmunism.
The CiiAiRMAisr. And then, way back in 1958, the committee pub-
lished a consultation with you on the subject of The Irrationality of
C om,mAinisnh,
Dr. NiEMEYER. Indeed, sir.
The Chairman. Now, you said something about being connected
with the State Department for a while.
Dr. NiEMEYER. Yes.
The Chairman. In what area ?
Dr. NiEMEYER. In the Office of United Nations Affairs. I was
a planning adviser in the Office of United Nations Affairs from
1950 to 1953.
The Chairman, Proceed.
Dr. NiEiMEYER. Thank you.
I submit that a new agency of this type as outlined in H.R. 5368
is called for, because the conflict itself is of a new type unprecedented
in the history of this Nation, a type of conflict for which we are very
poorly organized.
We have been conducting the cold war as if it were a traditional
conflict between great-power interests. This type of conflict, with
which the 19th century has made us familiar, turns on territories,
boundaries, and the imponderables of a nation's position among other
nations. Its ultima ratio is a military test of strength, for which
nations prepare through armaments and alliances. In this kind of
conflict, one tries to protect one's interests while avoiding war as much
as possible. If war breaks out, though, one fights it until a peace
treaty is achieved, after which the contestants continue as nations, albeit
in different political circumstances.
The cold war appeared to be that kind of a conflict because the Com-
munist Party obtained control of Russia, a great power, and has used
Russia's manpower and other resources for its strategic purposes. The
cold war, nevertheless, has not arisen from a clash between the na-
tional interests of Russia and those of the United States. It has arisen
out of the ideological obsession of Communists with the destruction of
what they call the bourgeois society or, as they now term it, the world
system of imperialism. Although our country is located at the op-
posite side of the globe from Russia, the Communists have identified
the United States as their main enemy because they see in us the core
of capitalistic imperialism. They are fighting us with the power means
of Russia, but what fights us is not Russia. Rather, it is the ideologi-
cal enterprise of communism aiming at the total destruction and sub-
version of our society.
In the cold war, it is not boundaries and territories, spheres of in-
fluence and relative power which are at stake, even though all these
play a certain role. Nor is war the ultima ratio of this struggle. Nor
is a peace treaty the prospective outcome if war should break out. The
Communists are fighting to dissolve, decompose, disintegrate, and de-
stroy our society, institutions, authorities, and habits of thought and
heart. We are fighting to free our society from this kind of assailant.
The Communists do not look on war as their chosen means to obtain
1276 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
their ends. In all their history, they have opted for a minimum of
force when coming to power, and for a maxuniun of force and terror
only after they had secured full control of the public means of com-
pulsion. They have gained access to these means mostly with the help
of allies with whom they were united in coalitions and whom they de-
stroyed as soon as they had become public officials.
Internationally, the same is true. We have armed ourselves and
successfully maintained a formidable alliance. We have deterred the
enemy from any large-scale military attack on us. But in the Middle
East, Africa, South Asia, and Latin America the Communists have
established new positions of strength without military attack. Our
military ramparts are still strong. But the enemy has moved under-
neath and around them, even in our midst, creating a neutralist move-
ment directed against the possession or use of nuclear weapons. These
are not the methods of conventional great-power conflict. We are
fighting an enemy who controls a nation and often looks like that na-
tion's representative, but has aims and moti^^es quite different irom
those of a national government. We are threatened by an intent that
assaults not merely our power but our way of life. And we are con-
fronted by methods of persuasion, manipulation, and subversion the
like of which no great nation has faced before.
I am saying all of this in order to establish to some extent the rea-
son why we have done poorly in the cold war so far.
I believe that this is not due to any "softness on commimism" in
leading circles, as has been often alleged, but simply to a confusion of
the cold war with a traditional great-power conflict. And that con-
fusion I do not think stems from sinister motives. The truth is that
our Government is now organized in its external capabilities to meet
the kind of threat that is involved in a traditional great-power conflict,
the only kind of power conflict with which we have been familiar.
For mstance, the State Department is organized by regions and
countries. To this day, it does not have a single office which is devoted
to the problem of communism, as such, or to the problems of fighting
communism on a global scale. Its capabilities in general are mainly
in the field of diplomacy, that is, dealing with other nations' govern-
ments. The enemy we are facing may have a power base in one coun-
tiy, but it is an enterprise with a worldwide organization and a global
strategy.
We have no Government agency geared to world communism as
such. The Psychological Strategy Board, which functioned for a
while, has ceased to operate as a cold war agency. The regional or-
ganization of the State Department is reflected in the regional or area
studies in our universities. Again, countries, languages, cultures, and
governments are the focus of our efforts there. We do not train any-
where experts in communism or experts in the methods of communism.
The Freedom Academy bills are designed to remedy at least one
aspect of this deficiency. The Academy is, as the State Department
acknowledged, designed as a cold war agency.
Creation of such an agency would mean that we would at long last
begin to adjust to the kind of conflict in which we are. So far, we
have created only one other agency directly geared to cold war re-
quirements, Radio Free Europe. Significantly, it is an agency work-
ing in, and with the help of, the private sector in order to attain tlie
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1277
flexibility which the Government officially could not have in this
capacity.
This acknowledges the fact that the official organization of our
Government is not geared to the medium and the methods through
which the cold war is largely fought. Not only can a government
through its official agents not penetrate into all the nooks and crannies
where cold war operations are going on, but even if it could, it would
not be to the nation's best interest that its government should be en-
gaged in power contests with forces which appear in private garb.
In many countries in the world, local Communist and pro-Commu-
nist elements confront directly the official representatives of the
United States. It would be far better if battle against the Commu-
nists were done equally by forces operating in the private sector with
local organizations and local means of influencing opinion and alle-
giances. The Communists have a network of party organizations
throughout tlie world. We have nothing like a pro-American Party
or a pro-Freedom Party anywhere in the world. Slaybe it is good that
we have nothing of that kind. I think it might be a great danger if
we would aim at a party to match the totalitarian Communist Party.
It would not destroy freedom, though, if people willing to fight Com-
munists in other countries received training and information, finan-
cial and moral support from a cold war agency equipped with the best
human resources we have. It does not take a totalitarian party to
fight the Communist Party and it does not take Communist methods
to frustrate the Communists in their designs. It does take, however,
people and organizations and methods other than we are employing
now. The cold war is so unprecedented that we still have to learn how
to fight it. The Freedom Academy would be an institution where this
learning could be done.
Now, it seems to me that between the two possibilities which have
been discussed this morning, the Fi*eedom Academy is better designed
for its purpose for three reasons: It is meant to devote intensive
study to communism for a period long enough to produce results;
it would be set up within the Government, but sufficiently apart from
the existing agencies to allow the development of new ideas of cold
warfare; and the inclusion of the private sector in the range of its
competences will make it possible to mobilize forces for the cold war
which alone can meet the Communists on the ground where the tell-
ing battles are fought.
Among tliose who for many years have fought Communists abroad,
in other countries, often alone, ijiostly without support, quite fre-
quently against resistance of our foreign personnel, and entirely
without our guidance, the proposed Freedom Academy has inspired
hopes that finally the free world will gird its loins for political war-
fare. Our best hope for countering Communist advances is to mobil-
ize this latent strength, to close the ranks of all potential victims of
communism, and to unite the already existing centers of resistance.
If the Communists can extend their influence by nonmilitary means,
under the cover of the mutual atomic deterrent, so can we, and with
better chances of success.
The Freedom Academy is significant as a mute declaration that we
are out to win (he cold war without an atomic holocaust.
1278 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
The Chairman. You have heard Secretary Harriman testify this
moming?
Dr. Neemeyer. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Are there any comments you would care to maKe
on some of his objections?
Dr. NiEMEYER. I think the questioning of the committee has
brought out quite rightly that there are no substantial differences
in the purposes of the two bills and the two training institutions ; and
Congressman Ichord, I tliink, has come to the conclusion here, in
questioning Mr. Harriman, that therefore the essential difference
which the State Department must see is in the control of these in-
stitutions.
As I see it, the State Department wants to have an enlarged For-
eign Service Institute, whereas the Freedom Academy bill foresees
an agency which is sufficiently separate to be novel and, therefore,
flexible enough to develop new methods and new insights into cold
war operations.
Now, it seems to me that to the extent to which our training and
information on communism has been deficient — and the course of
the cold war suggests that it has been deficient in more than one
way — ^to this extent a simple enlargement of the Foreign Service In-
stitute does not promise any improvement over the previous perform-
ance, and I would say that an improvement over the previous per-
formance could only be hoped for by the establishment of something
that is new and to some extent — not wholly, but to some extent —
separate from the existing State Department agencies and State De-
partment controls.
The Chairman. Off the record.
(Discussion off the record.)
(At tliis point, Mr. Tuck left the hearing room.)
Mr. Pool. Governor Tuck had this question, and he had to leave.
But we were discussing it here in private. We wondered if limiting
the studies and the work to anti-Commimist problems would defeat
the argument that it is a Federal control of education. What would
be your comments on that ?
Dr. NiEMEYER. I don't see this as a public education project on a
large scale. I see it as a project to train and inform people who are
willing or in the business of fighting communism, and it has been said
before that these may be trade union officials or they may be jour-
nalists or they possibly may also be public teachers who would come
there for a particular purpose.
I see it also, however, largely as a training ground for foreign stu-
dents, and maybe this would turn out to be the most important func-
tion of this institution.
It has been said that citizens and functionaries, both foreign and
domestic, could receive their training at the universities. Well, I am
in university training and I teach a course on Coimnunist ideology, a
whole year course at Notre Dame University. I am not aware of any
imiversity where people could be trained for purposes of cold warfare
and for purposes of that kind of thorough information on all aspects
of the Communist enterprise that would enable them to go out and
fight the cold war. There simply is no such program at any university,
and I don't see that any university is set up for such a program.
(At this point, Mr. Ichord left the hearing room.)
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COIVIMISSION 1279
Mr. Pool. My question is, Would you limit tlie purposes to research
ill communism and methods to fight communism ?
Dr. NiEMEYER. Yes, I would, sir, because I believe this, the negative
purpose is the purpose on which all people can unite. As soon as one
introduces a positive purpose there indeed might be an element of in-
doctrination which would be dangerous.
Mr. Pool. Thank you.
Mr. ScHADEBERG. I just Want to thank you for a very fine statement.
Dr. NiEMEYER. Thank you, Congressman.
The Chairman. The session will resume at 2 o'clock, and the hear-
ing room will be the District of Columbia Room.
(Whereupon, at 12 : 30 p.m., Thursday, February 20, 19G4, the com-
mittee recessed to reconvene at 2 p.m., the same day.)
AFTERNOON SESSION, THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1%4
(The committee reconvened at 2 p.m., Hon. Joe R. Pool presiding.)
(Committee members present: Representatives Pool, Ichord, and
Johansen.)
Mr. Pool. The committee will come to order. We will go ahead with
the testimony. It is a few minutes after 2 and some of the members
could not be here. But I will go ahead and start the hearing. I am
sure some of the others will come in, in a moment. Dr. Lev E.
Dobriansky.
Before you start, Dr. Dobriansky, I notice you have a statement
about your background. If you want to enlarge on that slightly, it
will be all right with me.
STATEMENT OF LEV E. DOBEIANSKY
Dr. Dobriansky. Fine. Mr. Chairman and distinguished Mem-
bers : My name is Lev E. Dobriansky. I am a professor of economics
at Georgetown University and formerly taught at New York Univer-
sity. I am also privileged to serve as the president of the Ukrainian
Congress Committee of America, the chairman of the National Cap-
tive Nations Committee, and as an editor of the American Security
Council's Washington Report. I was formerly a faculty member of
the National War College and have been a lecturer at many of our
sei'vice schools.
At the outset of my formal statement, I express my deepest appre-
ciation for this opportunity to testify on the five resolutions calling
for the creation of a Freedom Commission and the establishment of
the Freedom Academy. Both for the organizations I head and for
myself, we are in complete favor of the passage of this extremely
important measure that all five resolutions substantially embrace.
The tremendous and pressing need for this independent agency and
the special educational institution cannot be too strongly emphasized.
In order not to duplicate some of the thoughts and ideas of other
proponents of the measure, I should like to clevelop somewhat unfa-
miliar avenues of reasoning that justify the existence of a Freedom
Commission and Academy. For your studied consideration and also
1280 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
in rational support of the affirmative position taken by us on this far-
seeing measure, we offer the following concise observations, all of
which can be readily and extensively documented.
THE PEEMANENT COLD WAR
(1) The necessity for the passage of this measure is inextricably
tied up with the basic issue of the very survival of our Nation. This
statement is no exaggeration. When one soberly considers how much
has been lost since World War II, he can with considerable validity
caption his thoughts with the constant and foreboding question,
""Wlio's next in the long string of captive nations — South Vietnam,
Laos, Venezuela, Zanzibar?" The pessimistic overtones of this
gnawing question, which will be answered in the latest chapter of our
cold war failures, particularly with regard to the Russian base of
global cold war operations, need not, of course, be necessarily ac-
cepted for the long future. But in our present state of free world
cold war disintegration, who can reasonably deny that it rests on firm
grounds of near probability ?
Had we, over 10 years ago, in operating existence what is sensibly
designed in these five resolutions, we as a nation would have main-
tained our clear-cut superiority in world leadership without the phan-
tasms of a Soviet Russian contender. Lest we be mistaken, this is not
entirely an observation from hindsight, even though such an obser-
vation should in itself draw respectful attention. The plain fact is
that the fundamental nature of the imperialist Soviet Russian enemy
had been clearly revealed many, many years before the outbreak of
hostilities in 1939. Those of us who understood this then and, later
at the beginning of the fifties, advocated a policy of liberation were
in truth proposing the development of a cold war strategy to defeat
the Russian enemy in the only area he's capable of winning, that of
paramilitary conquest. Regrettably, even those who gave official
lipservice to the policy of liberation failed to understand what it
meant in essence and content.
Hampered by all the trimmings of a cultural lag, this measure, over
10 years later, still points to the most essential course open to us in
combating successfully and decisively the propagandistic, psycho-
political, conspiratorial, and subversive inroads made by Moscow in
the free world. In fact, it is hyperessential today ; more than it was
over a decade ago when we enjoyed complete military superiority, air
supremacy, and atomic monopoly power. With the relatively declin-
ing longrun importance of military might and power as our chief
source of deterrence against both the further expansion of Moscow's
empire and the horrendous outbreak of a global hot war, the critical
area of the foreseeable future will be that of vigorous and imaginative
cold war activity. The sheer adequacy of imperial Russian arms and
industrial capacity has produced a formidable power of influence that
shifts the points of comparative advantage to operations within the
cold war area.
Vested with complete futural significance of the most crucial sort,
the measure under consideration here aims to equip us with the neces-
sary means of coping adequately with the devious cold war operations
of Moscow and now also Peiping, twin sisters in established imperio-
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1281
colonial practices. These practices include a whole range of psycho-
political infiltration and subversion, from which no sphere of human
existence is excluded, even entailing "peace," "peaceful coexistence,"
"disarmament," "lessening of tensions," "coexistence or codestruc-
tion," and other Russian cold war shibboleths. In short, it is an
illusion to believe that so long as the Russian and Chinese imperial
systems continue to exist, the cold war would or could be terminated
by trade, appeasement, wishful thinking about "mellowing processes,"
and even the self-disintegration of the captive world. The long truth
is that the cold war is an institutional coefficient of these systems. The
sooner we come to grips with this fundamental truth, the sooner we'll
be contributing to our own survival.
THE ENEMY IN HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE
(2) The passage of this measure and its full realization would
make possible, at long last, concentrated studies of Russian cold war
operations in terms of indispensable historical perspectives which
would deepen our insights into the basic nature of the enemy. Careful
analyses along these and primarily substantive lines would reveal
that what we classify today as Moscow's cold war techniques and
methods are essentially traditional to totalitarian Russian empire-
building. Contrary to general opinion, they are not the created prod-
ucts of so-called Communist ideology and tactics. Except for acci-
dental refinements and considerable technologic improvements, many
of the techniques manipulated by the rulers of the present Russian
empire, and also applied by their Red Chinese competitors, can be
systematically traced as far back as the 16th century. Indeed, over a
half century before Marx, the Russian ambassadors of Catherine the
Great utilized class-division techniques to prepare for the partitions
of Poland. Countless other examples of striking comparative worth
and value can be cited.
In a real sense, such specialized studies conducted by an independent
agency set up to concentrate on political warfare stand to have more
comparative value for our national security and defense than literally
the billions spent on military hardware and economic foreign aid.
These fashioned techniques and methods of Moscow are relatively new
to us because of our historical unfamiliarity with them. Yet, sig-
nificantly, they are old and tried to all the captive nations in Eastern
Europe, in the U.S.S.R., in and about the Caucasus and central Asia.
In sharp contrast to the ways and means of past Western imperialism
and colonialism that throve on oversea possessions, the methods of
Russian imperio-colonialism were forged to extend an overland em-
pire, with all their borderland implications. By these methods and
techniques, an unprecedented empire was built over the centuries and
in 1918 revived and enormously expanded by the present Soviet Rus-
sian rulers.
Of conspicuous note concerning the past, as well as contemporary,
Russian expansion in power, control, and influence is the outstanding
fact that the polyglot, multinational military forces under Moscow
have played essentially a secondary role. With patience and in time,
the primary role has consistently been played by Russian conspiracy,
propaganda, diplomatic duress, and subversion. And this includes
1282 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
our latest period, from World War II to the present, with Khrushchev
as the master player in this <^rand enterprise. Our understanding of
these rulers over the centuries is indispensable to adequate prepara-
tions and ability on our part to cope with phenomena of intensive
revolutions and conquests from within in independent and also emerg-
ing states and nations of the free world. Here too, in short, we are
confronted by a cumulative experience not of only 47 ^ears but rather
of centuries, and the Soviet Russian heirs of this experience possess an
enormous advantage that few of their predecessors had — that of tech-
nology and science. The objectives envisaged by the five resolutions
point in the direction of such major study. Along these lines there is
a terrible gap in our knowledge, both in the official and private sector;
indeed, even rudimentary facts about the chief enemy are not prop-
erly mierstood or even Imown — again in many official and private
quarters.
Mr. JoiiANSEN. Will you let me interrupt at this point to ask this
question so that it will be associated with this comment?
Dr. DoBRiANSKY. Yes, sir.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Incidentally, I am happy to see you here today.
Doctor.
Would the gentleman feel that supplying of this information both
to those in Government and to those who are private citizens or
leaders in the private sector constitutes indoctrination ?
Dr. DoBRiANSKY. Not at all, sir. I will come to that point if I may.
I didn't have a chance to incorporate some of it — let us put it, some
of the observations made by the Secretary this morning, but I will
allude to them.
Mr. JoHANSEN. I won't interrupt further.
Dr. DoBRiANSKT. This gap in our knowledge is an obvious, gratui-
tous advantage to Moscow's cold war experts.
SOME CONCRETE CASES OF WON OR LOST OPPORTUNITIES
(3) In the light of swift-moving developments in the past decade
and more, this measure and its passage are actually long overdue.
The essential ideas of this measure were approvingly considered by
the Select House Committee to Investigate Communist Aggression
some 10 years ago. It is noteworthy that through this committee
Congress' made its substantial contribution to our developing knowl-
edge of the imperialist Soviet Russian menace. It was at the initiative
of, and by the vision of. Congress that this tremendous stride was
made.
Now, the present resolutions in more elaborate and adequate form
crystallize the thoughts and vision of the many who have given serious
consideration and study to the nature and scope of cold war operations
under the contrived conditions of "neither peace nor war." Based on
much precedent thought and the intensive investigations of previous
congressional committees, the embraced measure promises to lay the
necessary foundations for us to meet intelligently and competently
the cold war thrusts and maneuvers of Moscow and Peiping.
The spectrum of cold war ideas and engagement is a most extensive
one. However, let me briefly cite a few concrete examples in which
congressional initiative, as against routinous executive inertia or
myopia, contributed to our cold war posture. One, in 1958, if Congress
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1283
hadn't acted in time, the vital VOA non-Russian language broadcasts
into the Soviet Union would have been systematically eliminated, and
much to the satisfaction of Moscow. Two, the passage of the Captive
Nations Week Resolution in 1959 demonstrated to the world how
deeply vulnerable Moscow is with regard to the captive non-Russian
nations in the Soviet Union alone. The typical, mythical image that
millions throughout the world have of the Soviet Union could be easily
transformed if we even began to implement that resolution. On this
I should like to submit as part of my statement an article I have
written on "The Next Move," which appeared in the Januaiy 6, 1964,
issue of the American Security Council's Washington Report.
Mr. Pool. Is that just a page or two there ?
Dr. DoBRiANSKY. Yes.
Mr. Pool. Without objection then it may be admitted. (See pp.
1294-1297.)
Dr. DoBRiANSKY. A third example, with which most of our people
are unfamiliar, concerns Congress' passage of legislation in 1960, pro-
viding for the erection in our Capital of a statue of Taras Shevchenko,
the Ukrainian poet and freedom fighter. The ramifications of this
action would amaze any close student of cold war operations; in 1961
we thwarted Moscow's perversion of this historic figure and just a few
months ago, given what they considered an opening wedge provided by
several obtuse editorials of a local newspaper, Moscow and its puppets
slickly attempted to destroy the project here. On this seemingly
minor action I should also like to submit as part of the record this
recently published booklet, /Shevchenko, A MonuTiient to the Libera-
tion, Freedom, and Independence of All Captive Nations, and be-
cause of its voluminous nature, Mr. Chairman, I will just make it
available to the members of the committee, then.
Mr. JoHANSEN. If I may interrupt, but the newspaper that the wit-
ness refers to is the Washington Post, and I would like to have it in the
record that it is.
Mr. Pool. Put that in the record.
Dr. DoBRiANSKT. I would raise no objection to that.
Mr. Pool. We appreciate the pamphlet. We will not print it in the
record.
Dr. DoBRiANSKT. It is 119 pages in length and it can be supplied
to each member if he is is interested, as a concrete case.
But I would appreciate the printing of this material, a most inter-
esting docmnent distributed by the Russian Embassy to our wire
services and newspapers concerning, again, this seemingly minor
Shevchenko affair.
Mr. Pool. Identify it for the reporter.
Dr. DoBRiANSKT. The document is a propaganda appeal with a cover
letter written by Yuri I. Bobrakov of the Press Department of the
Embassy of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.
Mr. JoHANSEN. This is the Washington Embassy ?
Dr. DoBRLVNSKY. Yes. The matter was obviously considered in
Moscow and Kiev ; they got into the act. This is dated December 30,
1963.
Mr. Pool. It may be admitted without objection. (See pp. 1298-
1300.)
Congress cannot, of course, be expected to take such initiative con-
tinually along the entire spectrum of commonsense cold war challenge.
1284 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
Some opportunities, as those cited, have been won; there are many
that have been lost. In the area of the Olympic Games, for instance,
which also has cold war significance with the emerging myth of the
pliysically supreme "Soviet man," we again have lost the opportunity
of smashing this myth by not insisting that non-Russian participants
from the U.S.S.R. be properly identified as representatives of their
respective national republics. By no means are all the medal victors
Russians. However, as in the last decade, so m this one. Congress can
make a monumental contribution to our eventual victory in the cold
war by passing this Freedom legislation in this session. In brief, it
would be creating a sorely needed generator of ideas and proposals
along the entire spectrum of the titanic cold war challenge.
INSTITUTIONAL INSTRUMENTS OF ENLIGHTENMENT AND STABILITY
(4) Without perhaps incurring the wrath of one of your colleagues
who isn't on this committee but on the banking committee, I would say
that by analogy, and a rough one at that, the existence of a Freedom
Commission and a Freedom Academy is as necessary to our national
being today as is the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve Sys-
tem. In like manner that the latter is purposed to achieve stability and
balanced development in our economy, the former would strive to ac-
complish the same in our undertakings under the indefinite condi-
tions of "neither peace nor war." It is safe to say that because our
people have not, by and large, understood the nature, scope, and depth
of Moscow's cold war operations, they have been constantly subjected
to wide fluctuations of mood and sentiment, giving way at times to dan-
gerous complacency and even seeming indifference toward the vital
force of their treasured heritage and values and, at other times, to
near hysteria.
Dispersed and much- frittered thinking, as now exists, in cold war
dimensions will guarantee a continued instability in popular reactions
and a safe passivity in official determinations. With the Russians and
Chinese operating in virtually every quarter of the free world, even
endemic developments rapidly assume a broad cold war stigma. They
require continuous, studied assessment leading to recommendations
for not only adequate counteraction but also an effective offensive, and
this is the one place that the Russians are most vulnerable; namely,
the captive non-Russian majority in the U.S.S.R. itself. The only
practical apparatus for this type of concentrated and totalistic think-
ing is the proposed Commission and Academy, which veritably would
become institutional instruments of enlightenment and stability.
ARGUMENT AND COUNTERARGUMENT
(6) The argument and counterargument on this most vital issue
should receive on the part of the committee the most exacting and
scrutinous type of internal analysis. I submit that upon such analysis
the negative and inconsistent responses to the measures at hand from
certain executive agencies constitute in themselves a negative support
of the proposals. Behind the usual, verbally graced generalities they
reflect an uncertainty of position, misstatement of facts, and an appar-
ent incapacity to grasp the structure of cold war thought, which finds
easy confirmation in our record of the past 20 years.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1285
Viewing first the concise, positive arguments on the measure, I
repeat that to meet satisfactorily the tasks and requirements indicated
above, an independent agency devoted exchisively to the content of
cold war operation is indispensable. There is no existing agency or
department in our Government that is equipped by intent or resources
to meet these tasks. No existing governmental body is designed to
treat and study Russian cold war phenomena in all their interrelated
parts and aspects. Administratively, there is no principle of coordi-
nation and integration represented by any body in this intricate and
complex field. More, there is no principle of crystallization and con-
servation of thought represented, as one department vies with another
in a "play it by ear" mood to determine whether even food has a cold
war weight.
The creation of a Freedom Commission would correct these grave
defects and fill in the gaps that currently exist. It would, at long last,
provide us with a functioning apparatus, free of the routinous day-to-
day operational responsibilities in the existing agencies, to deal with a
foremost challenge in a totalistic, continuous, and coordinated way,
rather than the piecemeal, sporadic, and essentially defensive ways that
have prevailed up to the present. Similarly, there is no educational in-
stitution maintained by our Government or any private body that is
capable of conducting these necessary and continuous studies and in-
struction on this new plane of comprehensive cold war thought. The
intended Freedom Academy would satisfy this basic need.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Mr. Chairman, may I break my promise to ask this?
Are you in a position to comment on what resources we have in this
coimtry at the Hoover Library at Stanford ? Are you familiar with
that?
Dr. DoBRiANSKY. Yes, I am, sir. I would say that actually you have
what might be called an embryo in the field of empirical cold war re-
search,
Mr. JoHANSEN. And raw materials.
Dr. DoBRiANSKT. And raw materials; but still raw materials that
require a great deal of refining. Again this is in the compartment of
research. It doas not go into that of methodic instruction and, beyond
this, in what one might call cold war operations via organizations and
other media, which I shall allude to in a moment, sir.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Thank you, sir.
Dr. DoBRiANSKY. Now for a few negative arguments. Of course,
Mr. Chairman, I did not have time to incorporate some of the things
that Mr. Harriman said, although in my statement I tried to deal with
all the major points that have been raised in the past.
However, I would like at this point to address m5^self to what I
consider the verbal tactics of Mr. Harriman.
First, the matter of indoctrination. Having been a student of philos-
ophy myself, I do not see any intellectual dirt involved in the word
"indoctrination." I think he himself revealed the hollowness of his
position when he practically synonymized what he meant by indoctrina-
tion with brainwashing.
There is no attempt here to brainwash anyone, let us say, in an estab-
lished curriculum of the Freedom Academy and the like. The fact is
that if students are studying Communist doctrine and if I were the
teacher in a classroom, I would make sure that they understood that
30-471—64 — pt. 2 4
1286 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
doctrine thoroughly. Thus on a conceptual, abstractive level I would
be indoctrinating them in order for them to grasp the systematic fea-
tures of someone else's thought.
This does not necessarily mean that I would be imposing an accept-
ance on their part or an intellectual assent by them to that doctrine.
So, in communicating intellectually with them, it would be not just a
matter of informing, but also actually of illuminating the thought
structure — the doctrinal edifice. When we deal with concepts and
their interrelationships, even in economics it is necessary to build up
these conceptual structures in the minds of the students and, as a
consequence, you do get into the process of indoctrinating ; again, for
sheer, objective imderstanding, if nothing else.
Mr. JoHANSEN. If you were doing the same thing, either with a
group of visiting foreign students or even a group of American stu-
dents, and I think some of them can stand it, if you were doing it in
the matter of the Constitution of the United States, you would be doing
the same thing.
Dr. DoBRiANSKY. That is correct. It is a matter of systematic,
methodical inculcation.
Mr. Pool. Would you limit the field of research and education to
communism and fighting communism ?
Dr. DoBRiANSKY. It is considerably more than communism. I think
my subsequent remarks will show that, sir.
Mr. Pool. How far afield would you go? What I am thinking
about is the argument made by Secretary Harriman this morning that
this bill would tend to give Federal control over education. I am
wondering, should we limit it to what we are interested in mainly, the
fighting of the Communists?
Dr. DoBRiANSKY. Ycs, but it addresses itself not simply to com-
munism; there are many other elements in this cold war opponent.
I made reference, for example, to Russian imperio-colonialism, which
is a most vulnerable point with Moscow. This could be easily docu-
mented to show the element working in combination with the ideology
of conununism.
Now there are proponents of the measure who feel that the enemy
is purely communism. As many know, I have looked upon commu-
nism chiefly as a tool of ideologic deception. Although it is such a
tool, it is nevertheless an instrumental menace because there are people
who could be deceived by it and are being deceived by it in the free
world, as well as some behind the Iron Curtain.
Mr. Pool. Is the purpose stated in the bill too broad or should it be
cut down to what we are really after ?
Dr. DoBRiANSKY. I do not think it is broad at all. As a matter of
fact, I think the "whereas" provisions afford this more expanded in-
terpretation without misleading us into the area that Mr. Harriman
and others have in mind, that is, the purely academic exercises such as
we have at Georgetown and elsewhere with regard to foreign affairs.
These bills address themselves specifically to cold war thinking, po-
litical warfare, and if you will allow me to continue, you will see what
I am referring to.
Another thing, of course, that Mr. Harriman brought out was the
matter of classified material.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1287
When I was in the National War College I had considerable access
to such classified material. However, all I can say here is that, as a
matter of fact, there is enough material with regard to the ways and
means, the content, the scope of Kussian political warfare that even
1 year of intensive training, whether you restrict it to Government
officials or, preferably, you also invite private citizens, would not be
enough actually to cover the breadth of unclassified material.
Mr. JoHANSEN. In other words, you could do a good job of re-
educating the State Department totally with declassified information.
Dr. DoBPiiANSKY. I am convinced of that, sir. This is as far as I
would like to go on the subject of classified materials, although I could
discuss in appropriate circumstances specific projects, including, for
example, Mr. Kersten's amendment to the Mutual Security Act at the
beginning of the fifties, when we attempted to set up, in implementing
the Kersten amendment, free national battalions integrated into
NATO. I am not impressed by what I would call the overstress of
fright on this matter of classified material by Mr. Harriman.
If I may continue with the negative arguments that I have extracted
from the responses of the executive agencies, over the years we have
been told, ( 1 ) that confusion with and a duplication of work of existing
agencies would occur; (2) that the Foreign Service Institute, the Na-
tional War College, and other public and private institutions already
furnish instruction on Communist strategy; (3) that a formulation of
cold war strategy and tactics into an "operational science" is a delu-
sion; (4) that training of operational elements (perhaps a dynamic
Freedom Corps as against our essentially defensive Peace Corps)
should not be publicized; (5) that the Russians would perhaps be ais-
concerted by what they may regard as a cold war institute and a train-
ing course for espionage; (6) that educational pluralism must be up-
held; and (7) that we are already making positive progress in eco-
nomic buildups in the underdeveloped countries and, in the fashion of
a passive model, in self-improvement at home.
Taking these major counterarguments in toto, it is evident that their
proponents either have no conception of total cold war or, if they do,
are desperately seeking any rationalization to safeguard the sanctity
of their respective jurisdictions against an inevitable subsumption to
the totality of cold war thought and performance.
Their first argument is specious because there is much confusion and
also frittered thought that requires integration and rounded
consolidation.
The second fallaciously magnifies a dearth of study and instruction,
meaning at the National War College or Foreign Service Institute or,
for that matter, at any of our private institutions, and indicates, in
itself, a dearth of understanding of what is involved in the Freedom
proposal.
The third argument reinforces this comment. The fourth one is
strange for an open society that should never cease in espousing and
working for universal freedom.
The fifth borders on stupidity as to the Russians being disconcerted
about this.
The sixth partakes of philosophical sophistication but, aside from
our perilous gap in cold war education, one wonders what happened
to pluralism with the new proposal last year of a National Academy
1288 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
of Foreign Affairs, which from all indications would be an egregious
and wasteful duplication of existing educational institutions, whether
at Georgetown, Pennsylvania, or elsewhere.
The seventh point can best be answered by just observing the slow
collapse of our policy of patched-up containment as evidenced today
in Cuba, tomorrow perhaps in Venezuela, South Vietnam, Laos, or
some other point on the terrain of the free world. We have a greater
breed of economic determinists in Washington than one can possibly
find in Moscow.
In conclusion, the Freedom CJommission and the Freedom Academy
would become valuable and highly effective media for both our pub-
lic and private institutions as concerns a general enlightenment and
understanding of the constant, dangerous threat that has penetrated
the free world. Their very existence and work would bar indiffer-
ence, complacency, naivete, or even hysteria toward this persistent,
totalitarian peril which is centered in Moscow.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Insofar as there is valid criticism of the so-called
extreme right in this area of communism, is this not the best antidote
there is for it, this type of program? The best antidote for the
excesses of extremism ?
Dr. DoBRiANSKY. There is no question about that. I certainly
would agree with that. Having followed this, with Mr. Grant and
others leading it, I would say that these people have contributed
solid thought and firm support for these jDroposals, by and large
people who have continually manifested a unique stability and a
great deal of perspective when it comes to the treatment of cold
war problems.
Mr. JoHANSEN. I agree with you.
Dr. DoBRiANSKY. There is no doubt about it.
I would like to stress this, that total cold war thought, in our case
necessarily oriented toward universal freedom, instrumentalizes every-
thing— diplomacy, economics, science, culture, propaganda (in which
we are next to pitiful), the military, even, among many other things
in life, athletics — in an integrated, aggregative whole for positive
action and successful performance.
Moscow has schools for this, and they haven't been established for
reasons of eternal contemplation. We have no such schools, and to
refer to any in this country as comparable to theirs is the height of
either ignorance or reckless foolery. Consider what you will, the
National War College, Harvard, Georgetown, or the Foreign Service
Institute.
In short, the service of the Freedom institutions in this specialized,
macro-psychopolitical field would be in fundamental service to our
own survival as an independent nation.
On grounds of national survival, we cannot afford to risk the pro-
spects of psychopolitical attrition or isolation as the dikes of patched-
up containment begin to fall about the world, not to mention other
paramilitary avenues of national reduction.
Mr. Pool. Mr. Ichord.
Mr. IcHORD. Yes, I wish to compliment you for a very informative
statement.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1289
It has been brought to the attention of the committee that this
proposal has been opposed by the far right. Do you know the basis
of that contention ?
Dr. DoBRiANSKY. Has been opposed by the far right ?
Mr. IcHORD. By the far right. The statement was made in the
committee the other day by Mr. Senner, I believe, that this bill was
opposed by the John Birch Society. Do you know anything about
their opposition ?
Dr. DoBRiANSKY. No, I do not, sir.
Mr. IcHORD. Do you know of any opposition from the far right ?
Dr. DoBRiANSKY. I havc not really come across any opposition. I
am trying to recall. Of course, back in 1960 there were some who
actually took the position that a Freedom Commission and a Free-
dom Academy, should they be established, would be targets of Com-
munist infiltration and, therefore, if anything, to fill in this truly
educational gap in our system, it would be better to have it, let us
say, at a private imiversity dealing with political warfare in its
totality.
That is about the only type of opposition that I have heard from
the far right.
My answer to this would be, then, that we might as well fold up
everything if we fear Communist infiltration.
Mr. IcHORD. You heard the Secretary of State or the Under Secre-
tary of State, Mr. Harriman, testify this morning?
Dr. DoBRiANSKY. Ycs, I did.
Mr. IciiORD. He is opposed to the training of large numbers of
private citizens in an academy, in the Freedom Academy or the Na-
tional Academy of Foreign Affairs. I would like to hear you com-
ment upon his objection.
Dr. DoBRiANSKY. I listened rather closely and if I'm not mistaken,
he failed to offer any justifying reasons for what appears to be simply
a comment. I mean a rational feeling on his part, other than bringing
up the matter of classified materials. But let me handle this matter
in this fashion. It is curious to me that many of our service schools —
you take, for example, the Army War College and to some degree at
the National War College and I am sure even in the State Depart-
ment— public seminars are conducted perhaps for an entire week and
with what purpose? Wliom do they bring in ? They bring in movie
producers, journalists, educators, people who have one degree of
influence or another, let us say, in media of public opinion through-
out our country. Wliy do they bring them in if not to some extent
inform them.
Then the other curious aspect of all this is that many a commander
or, let us say, a general at a given post who has been conducting the
study, oftentimes expresses regret that there are not enough re-
sources, not enough time to really impart what is necessary, not to
mention the problem of incorporating many others in such under-
takings.
Now the point here is that we are attempting to impress through
these very meager means some of this information on people who
affect public opinion in this country.
1290 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
I would say that even on the level of imparted information the
Freedom Academy would really overcome the limitations of these
gestures, these attempts on the part of our many service institutions.
When it comes to classified data, I cannot see that, let us say, a respon-
sible editor of a newspaper, whose background has been thoroughly
investigated, would necessarily be a person subject to question even
for the treatment of classified material, no more or less so than anyone
being in the armed services and eligible for instruction over a 10-
month period at the National War College.
Mr. IcHORD. In addition to operating the Freedom Academy the
Commission will also have the duty of operating the information
center.
Do you think this additional duty of operating the Information
Center might overburden the Commission ?
Dr. DoBRiANSKY. No, I do not believe that at all. I think the
Freedom information center M^ould be a very important and efficient
operational instrument at the disposal of the Freedom Commission.
Also, I have no fear concerning the supposed matter of indoctrination
because on the basis of my own experience — lecturing at various uni-
versities, being as I indicated in these service schools — I would say
that we are even pretty deficient in our rudimentary knowledge as
concerns the environment, the conditions surrounding the immediate
enemy.
I could go into specifics. We even have it displayed on the highest
levels of Government when, for instance, the chairman of the Senate
Freedom information center would be a very important and efficient
sians being in the Soviet Union. I do not think I am too intellectually
sensitive or picayune, but my reaction immediately is that there is some
deficiency in his understanding. I could go right down the line.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Would ^ou say why, because I would like the record
to show why there is a deficiency in knowledge.
Dr. DoBRiANSKT. There is this deficiency because of these points;
that actually even in our private institutions — and I for one have
many graduates from the Russian Centers, whether at Columbia or at
Harvard — students have almost no comprehensive, historical knowl-
edge of Eastern Europe or central Asia.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Doctor, I think you misunderstood me. You re-
ferred to the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee referring
to 200 million Russians.
Dr. DoBRiANSKY. Whicli there are not, even in the world at large.
Mr. JoHANSEN. I want you to state the misinformation you referred
to so that it will be clear as to the point you are making.
Dr. DoBRiANSKY. The point I was malring is that certainly if you
get this matter of political warfare, the presumption is that you are,
or will quickly become, familiar with the historical background of
and the conditions that prevail about your enemy.
Mr. JoHANSEN". I am not making myself clear. What is in error
about the statement that there are 200 million Russians?
Dr. DoBRiANSKY. The error is that, in fact, there are only about 100
million Russians in existence.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1291
Mr. JoHANSEN. That is what I wanted in the record to buttress your
point that that kind of misinformation was peddled by the chairman.
Dr. DoBRiANSKY. Eight. We have a good deal of that. I would
jiot want to take the time nor am I trying to put on a performance
pointing out such deficiencies in our working knowledge. But I
would like to say that for this kind of operation it will require a very
intensive research that we have not had. Oftentimes I feel rather
depressed when, as I said, I get students or address audiences who do
not even have a rudimentary grasp of the data you would presume
before embarking on a systematic study and instruction in what is
totalistic cold war thinking.
Mr. Pool. Do you have any further questions ?
Mr. JoHANSEN. Yes. On page 11, item No. 5, you cited one of
these arguments that the Russians would perhaps be disconcerted by
what they may regard as a cold war institute and a training course for
espionage.
I did not hear the very last of the testimony of Secretary Harriman.
I did not know whether you were referring to a point he had made or
what the source is of that sort of suggestion.
Dr. DoBRiANSKY. All seven points are actually taken from responses
made over time by various agencies when this measure was considered
over on the Senate side.
Mr. JoHANSEN. I would like to pursue this one just a bit more,
because it goes to my belief as to one of the main sources of opposition
to this, to wit, that if we have this type of program and they started
peddling the facts out of this Freedom Academy that it is going to
disrupt the State Department's program of not having any tensions
,with our enemies; that one of the main objections is that when the
Department decides that we must now be on an amiable mood with
them and we must underwrite wheat or we must do some other fool
thing, that having a Freedom Academy saying they are still our ene-
mies isn't going to fit in with their propaganda line.
That is the point that concerns me.
Dr. DoBRiANSKY. Congressman, I will agree with you that that may
be the motivation, but actually in looking at this issue objectively I
think that our whole attitude should be this : Whether that motivation
exists or not, let us view clearly the objectives and the values of the
institutions being proposed here.
Now Mr. Harriman can come before us and say that we have com-
mon objectives. But the cardinal point is this: that this whole issue,
as I understand it, hasn't to do with objectives. The issue has to do
really with an instrument that we want, a tool that we want. And to
use the argument that because the Communists have political warfare
schools, therefore we should not have them, is plainly specious. One
could turn that about and say the Communists have missiles, ergo, we
should not have missiles.
The chief point is that the Freedom Commission and the Freedom
Academy would actually be institutional tools that we do not now
have. I think that opponents to the measure — when they tell you that
1292 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
there is sufficient instruction across the Potomac or down at Fort
McNair or at any of our Russian Centers at Harvard, Fordham, Colum-
bia, or the institution I am with, Georgetown— are attempting to
hoodwink you. Either, as I stated before, they do not understand
what composite cold war thinking is — where diplomacy and eveiy
other area, what USIA does, what the military has, what the State
Department considers, are all looked upon as instruments in, if you will,
this totalistic disposition of thought — or they are rationalizing in
behalf of their respective present precincts of activity, narrow and
scattered as they are in this vital field.
Mr. JoHANSEN. I have one final question, Doct-or.
Do you feel there is any correlation between the reasons or alleged
reasons for opposition to this program and the kind of thinking
which prompted the Fulbright memorandum and prompted the cur-
tailment of the type of activities that were being carried on by Colonel
Kintner and some of the others prior to the promulgation of that
nefarious document?
Dr. DoBRiANSKY. Well, you are pressing me. I would say, of course,
that there is no question about it. I tried to use language here which
I think is diplomatic and tactful when I spoke of them desperately
seeking any rationalization to safeguard the sanctity of their respec-
tive jurisdictions against an inevitable subsumption. No question
about it, they do not wisli to face this kind of necessary subsumption
in thought and constructive practice. I am certain that there would
be a great deal of generation of imaginative and productive thought
from the Freedom Academy and the Freedom Commission ; and that
surely would be totally in line with our whole American tradition.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Thank you.
Dr. DoBRiANSKY. I also wish to suggest that there are many con-
crete instances that could be offered along these lines.
Let me give you one experience I had — to be sure, looked upon
perhaps by many as limited and many even opposed it in thought.
But when Congressman Lawrence Smith of Wisconsin was alive we
worked together on a concrete, cold war measure for the establishment
of diplomatic relations with Ukraine and Byelorussia. Favorable
hearings were held on this subject by the Foreign Affairs Committee.
Inevitably, we were drawn into a tug of war with people on the
other side of town. I mention this because it is significant for the
issue at hand. When Mr. Murphy was Under Secretary of State, I
met with him often on this subject and he readily admitted that they
have no operational arm in the Department to consider adequately
such specific, concrete projects. Now I maintain this is significant
and true because our people in State don't have the time, they don't
have the resources, over and beyond what we call the rituals of dip-
lomatic concourse and foreign affairs obligations. Indeed, there isn't
any precinct that can seriously attend to problems or projects or
thought of this nature.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1293
Mr. JoHANSEN. If I might make an observation, Mr. Chairman —
this is not stated by our witness — there seems to be an enthusiasm on
the part of the State Department for some do-it-yourself diplomacy
when it comes to providing tractors or drugs for Castro but not in this
issue.
Mr. IcHORD. Mr, Chairman, I want to make a statement for the
record. I disagree with my colleague, at least that was the inference
that I got from the gentleman from Michigan, that this issue had to
do with the sale of wheat to Russia. I disagree entirely with my col-
league from Michigan on the matter of sale of wheat but, simply put,
Doctor, is your position on this bill that in order to effectively fight
an enemy you have to know what he thinks, how he fights, and how
effectively to combat him, and that both inside and outside of Govern-
ment there is no institution or place where a private citizen or even a
governmental employee can go to get that type of knowledge and
training ?
Dr. DoBRiANSKY. That is correct.
Mr. JoHANSEN. I will agree with my friend and colleague on that
point.
Mr. IcHORD. I am glad we agree in that respect.
Dr. DoBRiANSKY. And I might say this : The perspective that I am
expressing here may perhaps be different, but the fact is that there are
people in this country who are graduates of military schools in the
Russian Empire under the czars.
Now, to be sure, less perfect, less refined, the type of course work
that was given in these imperial Russian war colleges, whether down
in the Caucasus or up in St. Petersburg, is essentially the type of coui^e
work I am speaking of here, in the modes of cold war thinking. Such
thought is fundamentally not new. It is not a mode of thought that
began, let us say, in 1917. But I will admit this : as I indicated in my
presentation, with science, with technology there has been an enormous
improvement, an enormous investment of resources in the Soviet Union
in this kind of preparation. For any one to saj^ that we have any in-
stitutions that compare in kind, I am not mincing words when I say
that any such statement or utterance is simply farcical.
Mr. Pool. We certainly appreciate your appearing before the
committee. Your testimony has been very thorough and has been very
helpful to the committee. On behalf of the committee I want to thank
you for being here.
Dr. DoBRiANSKY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
(At this point Mr. Schadeberg entered the hearing room.)
(The material submitted l^y Dr. Dobriansky follows :)
1294 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
Wasiiington, January 6, 196 4
THE ^'EXT MOVE
In response to the Communist" "peac^" offensive; we first, c'oTnproinised, technologi-
cally jpith^, nuclear 'test ban treaty; then we relented economically in the wheat deals.
What's ;ip>M; ip the name of "peaceful coexistence"? Khrushchev now desperately
wants our politico-moral acquiescence' fo his empire of captive nations,, and he seeks
to obtaiti. it .througl^ a. Soviet -styled non-aggression pact.
At th^ very pioment of signing the test ban treaty -- significantly the Treaty of Mos-
cow -- the Russian leader was" in rrlany ways m'akingtwo points perfectly clear: (1)
the coi,d w(ari.s a permanent _^enterprise and (2) a non-aggression pact is a high priority
Russian objective. At that time, his U. N. spokesman, Fedorenko, was attacking
Portuguese jcplijnial policies. and equating these policies with U.S. and Western
European policies in an attempt to influence Africa agaipst NATO. As to the second,
shortly, thql-eafier, at the Inter -Parliamentary Meeting in Belgrade. Khrushchev's
representatives hammered away at the "n'eed" for a non -aggression pact between the
WarpawtPact Nations and NATO if international tensions are to be relaxed. These
are just two of many exariipl'es of the' Soviet Russian pattern.
In the meantiine, reacting as usual to M'oscbw's maneuvers, we have been content-
ing ourselves with the mirage, of "progressive steps toward a genuine peace." In
government and elsewhere many believe tliatthe next step should' bp a ^'confidence-
>building" non-aggr-es.sion, pact with the world's foremost aggressor. This brand of
naive thinking is a' natural off shodt ofDur self-defeating policy Of "containment" and
■'all its qtcauterments of accommodation, coexistence with totalitarian puppet and
satellite regimes, and the unrealistic hope for a structural fragmentation of Mos -
cow's colpnialempire. ,
Editor's Note: Dr. Lev El' Dobrian'sky~is'-a professor af.,ecoapmic§ .at Georgetown
University. He is the author of the Captive Nations Week Resolution (Public Law
85-90) which was passed by Congress ih 1959-. 'This, resol-utlon provides that the
third week of July be set aside each year to remind the world of the nations held in
bondage by Russian imperialism. Dr. DobrianSky is also a member of the American
Security Council's Strategy Staff.
NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENTS AFFECTING THE NATIONS SECURITY
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1295
Khrushchev has his troubles, of course. Contributing to his present troubles was
a whole decade of unrest and uprisings among his captive nations, viz. to mention
a few, Ukraine in '50-51, Slovakia '52, East Germany '53, Turkistan '54, Georgia,
Poland and Hungary '56. (Many people do not realize that nationalistic, anti -Soviet
uprisings have occurred within the Soviet borders as well as within the East Euro-
pean satellites. ) Back in 1955 the power center of the world Communist conspiracy
recognized that it couldn't afford such perpetual opposition if its global cold war
ambitions v/ere to be satisfied. Moscow launched its massive campaign for "peace-
ful coexistence" and, profiting from the fear induced by its military and space tech-
nology from 1957 on, it has succeeded in preventing most Western governjTients from
concentrating on the core of the world's primary problem, Soviet Russian imperio-
colonialism.
Historically, the Russians have always been masters in capitalizing on their troubles
as well as tlieir strength. Most Americans would be horrified to learn hov/, both
officially and materially, we have aided the Russian imperio-colonialists in recreat-
ing and expanding their empire from 1918 to the present, particularly in periods of
"Russian troubles. " Whereas these periods, including the present one, should have
been seized as our opportunities for the advancement of world freedom and thus
genuine peace, they invariably have turned into phases of Russian power consolida-
tion.
We are going through such a phase now, abetting it, as before, with our wishful
hope for fragmentation of Moscow's empire, an erosion of its totalitarian power,
and the weaning of its supposedly nationalist puppet regimes. The continued ab-
sence of an affirmative cold war strategy and the succession of compromises are
now being eloquently rationalized as conscientious endeavors for peace, to be
balanced against the horrendous prospect of thermonuclear co-destruction. The
irony of it all is that this course paves the way for the outcome we all seek to avoid.
A politico -moral acquienscence to the Soviet Russian Empire will take us a long way
on this disastrous course.
Aside from the sticky problem, oi allied NATO consent, the chances for such acqui-
escence via a non-aggression pact depend on two contrary forces in the United States.
One is the accommodationist spirit which is growing because of the above mentioned
poorly founded hope and illusions. This spirit is based on a persistent inability to
profit from the lessons of history. Even on the highest levels of our government it
is marked by a serious lack of understanding in regard to the empire -state nature
of the Soviet Union, the long tradition of Soviet cold war policy and techniques, and
the means for defeating the Soviets in the cold war without precipitating a -hot one.
Common expressions of this force are "don't irritate the bear, " "the less said
about the captive nations the better, " "we must relax tensions".
If the spirit of accommodation is spread by further euphoria or plain fear, it wi
virtually guarantee the pact and our politico -moral acquiescence to Moscow's f£
I' ill
^ ^ , , J ._ .far-
flung empire. Countering this force is a second one based on the moral objectivi?
liberating the captive nations and clear understanding of the strategic importance
of thcLiO nations in the cold war.
1296 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
Aiding the totalitarian overlords of these nations on the basis of a "weaning"
theory fortifies the unwanted regimes, not the peoples in their struggle for free-
dom. Indeed, it undermines the struggle which in essence is a cold war between
the people and their Communist governments. The net result is a weakening of
our own posture in the cold war. A non-aggression pact would be a crushing blow
to that struggle.
- The Lessons of Captive Nations Week -
On these major points, the lessons of Captive Nations Week in this country are both
revealing and instructive. Millions of Americans know them; others have yet tii
grasp them. Many misconceptions of both the Captive Nations Week Resolution and
the Week itself still circulate, but once they're dissolved the reasons why Khrushchev
wants acquiescence to his empire become crystal clear. Also, it is an open secret
that accommodationists seeking a pact with the constant aggressor would have the
observance eliminated.
Khrushchev and his satraps have never opposed anything any more vehemently and
for so long as the Captive Nations Week Resolution (Public Law 86-80) v/hich Con-
gress passed in July, 1959. His unprecedented explosion at that time is a matter
of historical record. Here scores of officials were ben'ildered by the reaction. As
he testifies in his book Six Crises, former Vice President Nixon, who was then in
the USSR, found the resolution to be "the major Soviet irritant throughout my tour. "
Why this unusual Russian opposition to the resolution, then and since? Before 1959
our leaders had often spoken in behalf of some captive nations. Actually, thei-e are
several answers to the question. First, it was the first time that our government re-
cognized the numerous captive non-Russian nations in the USSR itself, such as Georgia,
Armenia, Ukraine and others. Khrushchev instinctively understood the meaning of
this for the false image of the USSR in the world at large. Second, being self-renew-
ing annually, the resolution could always be implemented to combat Moscov/'s cold
war operations. That this will in time be done is a source of apprehension for the
Russian cold war instigators. And third, as perpetual reminders of the slave half
of the world, both the resolution and the Week (3rd week in July) are stumbling blocks
to Moscow's deceptive campaigns for "peaceful coexistence" and a non-aggression
pact.
Just review these few highlights of Moscow's sensitivity to the law and Week. Still
in 1959, Khrushchev scorned the law in his Foreign Affairs article "On Peaceful
Coexistence"; at Camp David, according to Pennsylvania's Governor Scranton, "he
inveighed against it at a greater rate almost daily"; in October, before the Supreme
Soviet in Moscow, the Russian leader again denounced the law. In 1960, similar
denunciations flowed during the Week's observance and new tactics were employed
by Moscow to deflect world attention from the captive status of nations both within
and outside the USSR, viz., the sudden Moscow-sponsored publication in London of
pamphlets titled The Fifteen Soviet Republic, Today and Tomorrow - a "Potemkin"
version of their 'independence and prosperous growth" - and also Khrushchev's
tirade in the U.N. against "Western colonialism. " The November 20, 1960 issue
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1297
of the Neue Zurcher Zeitung gave a vivid report of how this maneuver almost back-
fired when Canada's John Diefeabaker broached the subject of the captive non -Russian
nations in the USSR, even producing a furor there.
Similar evidence grows for 1961-63. In '61, for instance, Khrushchev again violent-
ly attacked the resolution in the October Communist Party Congress, using the age-
old Russian diplomatic gimmick of "no interference in internal affairs. " Though
Western diplomats fall for th.is gimmick, the fact that numerous non-Russian nations
in the USSR itself were originally conquered by Soviet Russian imperialism reveals
the myth of this argument. The Week's observance in 1962 received similar treat-
ment. Then, in 1962, UNESCO aided Moscow's efforts immensely by publishing
the fraudulent Equality of Rights Between Races and Nationalities in the USSR. On
January 2 3, 196 3, Moscow's weekly The New Tijnes asked "Is it not liigh tiine to
discontinue the 'Captive Nations Week' in the United States?" On July 8, Pravda
beraxed the President for proclaiming the Week and "losing his sense of reality"
on July 14 Izvestia painted the Week as "a propagandistic trick of the American
enemies of the freedom and independence of nations." There is lots more.
The 1963 Captive Nations Week observance surpassed all others. The Week's Fifth
Anniversary in '64 holds high promise for both public non-acquiescence to a Russian-
styled non-aggression pact, and for a Special House Committee on the Captive Na-
tions. Or, as other peoples have found to their tragic regret, would you prefer to
follow Pavlovian Dr. Khrusnchev's advise: relax, be less tense about basic truths,
agree with our "truth", and you'll have "peace"?
LEV E. DOBRLANSKY
Editor
Edilor,
Dr. Ste'Jan Possony
Frank I. Jchnson
Dr. lames O.Atkjn'JCn
Or Lpv E, DobrigiTsky
Abn.ral 'Chester C. Ward,
USN (Rel.)
Chief, Washmslon Bureau
Lee R, Pennington
Researcii Director
William K. Lamt/iF, Ir.
STRATEGY STAfF
Karl Baarslag
Or Ahlhony T Bouscarcn
Anthony Hanigan
©aplatr J H Morse
USN (Bet )
Edgar Ansel Mowrer
Dr. Gerhart Niemeyer
Duane Thorin
Stanley J Tracy
NATIONAL STRATEGY COMMIHEE
USA (Ret )
Admiral Ben Moreell. USN (Ret )
Dr. Robert Morris
Or. Stelan Hossony
Admiral Felm B Stump, USN (Ret)
Dr. Edward Teller
General Albert C Wedemeyer, USA (Ret )
Admiral Chester C Ward, USN (Ret )
This report nay be quoted in
whole or in part it context is
preserved, credit given and copy
ol quote furnished.
AMERICAN SECURITY COUNCIL
The ASC WASHINGTON REPORT reports on national and international develop-
ments affecting the nation's security for the infonnation of its over 3500 member
imtitulions. The Washington Bureau staff and central research staff carefully research
each subject covered in a Washington Report. The facts in each issue are carefully
checked with several experts on the particular subject. Any recommendations made
in a Washington Report represent the thinking of the best available experts.
Many member institutions and cooperating organizations reprint the ASC Washing-
ton Report for their own employees or members. Some of these reprint it as their own
Washington Report with their own masthead. Many newspapers also reprint from
tlie Washington Report.
Member institutions may purchase additional subscriptions to the Washington Re-
port for their employees, educators, clergymen and government officials. Additional
copies of this issue available for ten cents each including postage.
123 North Wacker Drive, Chicago 6, Illinois
Washington Bureau: 1025 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Washington 6, D.C.
West Coast: 5931 West Slauson Avenue, Culver City, California
1298 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
Peess De:paktment
Embassy of the
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.
1706 18th Street NW., Washington, D.C.,
Decembku 30, 1963.
Enclosed is a message by 36 prominent Ukrainian public figures to all Ukrain-
ians in the U.S.A., to the Committee on the Monument to T. G. Shevchenko,
received by us from the Novosti Press Agency, Moscow, U.S.S.R. It may be
published as a whole or in part as you deem best.
We will appreciate your giving this consideration and, if publistied, giving
a credit line to Novosti.
Yours sincerely,
/s/ Y. Bobrakov,
Yuri I. Bobrakov,
Press Department.
WORTHY TRIBUTE TO GREAT POET
Message to Ukrainians, to all Ukrainians in the U.S.A., to the Committee on the
Monument to T. G. Shevchenko
Dear fellow-countrymen who live outside the Motherland :
It is with a feeling of profound respect and love for the genius of the Ukrain-
ian people, for the great poet, and revolutionary democrat Taras Grigoryevich
Shevchenko that we address to you this heartfelt message from the banks of
the Dnieper, from our dear Soviet Ukraine, from the sunny capital of our
republic — ancient and every-young Kiev.
Mankind includes the name of the great son of the Ukraine, Taras Grigorye-
vich Shevchenko, among its finest names. Peoples of the world know him as an
implacable fighter against slavery and injustice, against social and national
oppression.
Shevchenko's strong and passionate voice has, through time and distance,
found its way into the minds and hearts of millions of people in the world.
In paying tribute to Shevchenko mankind pays tribute to a great humanist,
to a singer of friendship among peoples, to a champion of freedom, happiness
and progress.
The significance of Shevchenko and his work in the life of our people is excep-
tional. The image of the poet, his titanic creative and public activity, lent
inspiration in the past to generations of fighters against autocracy, his rebel-
lious poetry called people to the barricades of revolution, his poetic and artistic
heritage has become an invaluable national treasure for us. The name of
Shevchenko is a symbol of honesty, truth, unflinching courage and ardent love
for the working people. Even today the poet's fiery lines strike cold fear in
the hearts of tyrants and butchers, holding up to shame tlie enslavers of every
kind, and rallying millions of people to the struggle for a bright future.
A patriot and a true sou of his people, Shevchenko always showed deep love
and respect for other nations, being a consistent internationalist. Everyone
knows of Shevchenko's dreams of "all Slavs becoming kind brothers," his friend-
ship with the Negro, Aldridge, and with Polish progressives and his profound
esteem for the men of Russian culture who bought him out of serfdom, his love
and brotherly feelings for outstanding Russian revolutionary democrats.
Shevchenko devoted all his powerful talent to his people, to the struggle for
their happiness. This is what makes his titanic figure stiU more imposing, the
feat of his life still more majestic and his rich creative legacy truly inestimable.
This is why he is understandable by, and dear and near to, all peoples of our
multi-national motherland. In the Soviet Union there is no city, town or village
where you can not hear the beautiful poetic lines of the great poet. Shevchenko
celebrations have long become a notable occasion not only for the Ukrainians,
but also for all Soviet peoples in our "great, free and new family."
Facts speak eloquently of the affection and admiration Soviet people feel for
the great son of the Ukraine. More than a hundred monuments to the poet have
been erected in the land of Soviets, and five museums have been set up. Over
three hundred populated areas, nine theaters and four institutions of higher
learning, including Kiev University, bear the name of Shevchenko.
His name has been given to plants, collective and state farms, palaces of cul-
ture, cinemas, stadiums, streets, parks and so on. The poet's works in our
country have been printed in millions of copies. Shevchenko's poems have been
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1299
translated into aU the languages of the fraternal peoples of the Soviet Union. His
Kobzar is particularly popular. During Soviet years it has been published 53
times in the Ukraine vfith a total printing of about two million copies. Shev-
chenko's famous Zapovit has been printed in 45 languages of the world.
In honor of the great poet's memory, the Ukrainian Government has instituted
state prizes named after Shevchenko. These are awarded every year to authors
of the best works in Ukrainian literature and art, which have won wide recog-
nition and have been highly appraised by our people.
Together with the other fraternal i)eoples of our country, the working people
of the Soviet Ukraine are preparing widely to mark a memorable date in lOfiJ —
the 150th anniversary since the birth of Taras Grigoryevich Shevcheuko. Last
year a Ukrainian delegation at a UNESCO session sponsored a proposal, which
was approved by the session, to commemorate that glorious anniversary through-
out the entire world.
Expressing the desire of all Soviet peoples to give the great poet his due, the
government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics has decided to erect in
Moscow, the capital of our country, a monument to Shevchenko, which will be
unveiled during the celebrations of his loOth birth anniversary.
Thanks to the concern shown by the Communist Party of the Soviet Union,
thanks to the triumph of the Leninist ideas of friendship and brotherhood, the
literary and artistic heritage of Shevchenko has been made available to the
entire country and has become part of the world's golden fund of culture. Just
as the Dnieper carries its waters past Taras' grave into one world ocean, so do
Shevchenko's creations like so many streams join the ocean of the human spirit,
introducing our bold Prometheus to ever-new generations.
The poet's creative genius is so vast that not only his contemporaries, not
only we, but also forthcoming generations will feel the strength of his fervent
poetry. This noble influence of the great singer of the people's lot is found
not only in Ukrainian literature, but also in the literature of other peoples as
well. Shevchenko has become an immortal poet of freedom, a poet of world
significance, an exponent of the aspirations of all peoples. In our day Shev-
chenko's poetry harmonizes with the desire of all oppressed and colonial peoples
and calls them to struggle for liberation from the capitalist yoke. Every heart
will respond to Taras' words about universal happiness and peace :
. . . There will be no enemy
On our renewed land.
But there will be sou
and mother and people on
Earth.
Our dear fellow-countrymen in distant lands :
Any news about the memory of Taras Shevchenko being honored beyond the
borders of our Motherland fills us with sincere joy as a manifestation of love
of the Ukrainians abroad for their great poet.
We think that you will be pleased too at the preparations which have now
begun on a wide scale in the Ukraine and the entire Soviet Union in anticipation
of the 150th anniversary of his birth. It is the sacred duty of every Ukrainian,
wherever he may be, to commemorate the great poet in every way and to dis-
seminate among other peoples Schevchenko's ideas of humanism, brotherhood
and friendship of peoples on earth.
We know money is being raised to erect a monument to Shevchenko in Wash-
ington, the capital of the United States of America.
We regard the erection of the monument to the great poet in Washington as
proof of the esteem shown to Shevchenko by the Ukrainians who live in the USA,
as a sign of profound respect on the part of the American people for the great
son of the Ukraine, to the whole Ukrainian people.
It is gratifying to us men of culture of the Ukraine, to all Ukrainians in our
native land, to learn that a monument will be erected to our poet in the United
States of America. We want this monument to become for you. our fellow-
countrymen, a piece of the Motherland. We propose to send to the American
continent some sacred soil from the Chernechya hill where Taras sleeps the
eternal sleep. We would gladly take part in the unveiling ceremony of your
monument, because Shevchenko and the Ukraine are inseparable. We favor
this worthy tribute to the great poet.
But we are resolutely against the malicious attempts of the enemies of the
Soviet Union to use the poet's works against our country, against the cause of
all humanity — the struggle for peace. We vigorously come out against the at-
tempts of some unprincipled people to employ his good name for their dirty po-
1300 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
litical ends. Their efforts to spend the hard-earned money, collected by the
Ukrainians living in the USA for a monument to Shevchenko, on propaganda
against the Ukrainian people and against the Soviet Union are causing anger
and indignation in us.
The working people of the Soviet Ukraine are confident that you, our distant
fellow-countrymen, share our anxiety. It is clear to everybody that the erection
of a monument to Taras Shevchenko on American soil must not become a means
for whipping up enmity towards our country, towards our people, but most facil-
itate mutual understanding between peoples, the preservation and consolidation
of peace throughout the world. An unbiased person will come to this conclusion.
Preparations for Shevchenko's memorable jubilee coincided with an event of
great significance for the strengthening of universal peace : three great powers —
the Soviet Union, the United States of America and Great Britain — concluded a
treaty banning nuclear weapon tests in the atmosphere, in outer space and under
water, a treaty which was fully supported by all peoples in the world. Already
this historic document has been signed by the governments of more than a hundred
countries. This fills all honest-minded people of the world with hope and
optimism.
The life and works of Taras Schevchenko, a staunch advocate of unity and
friendship of peoples, inspires us to struggle for peaceful coexistence, for general
and complete disarmament, for lasting -peace in the whole world.
Dear fellow-countrymen :
In his friendly message, "To My Fellow-countrymen in and out of the Ukraine,"
the great Taras solemnly bequeated the lines :
Learn from others.
But don't forget what you have.
iMay Shevchenko anniversaries become days from disseminating the poet's grand
ideals and promoting cultural relations between other countries and the Soviet
Ukraine.
We are thoroughly convinced that by paying tribute to Shevchenko mankind
pays tribute to the mighty talent and fond memory of the great poet and revolu-
tionary democrat. We believe that Shevchenko's image will always call for
sincere friendship, accord and cooperation among all nations of the globe.
M. Rylsky, P. Tychina, A. Korneichuk, B. Paton, L. Revutsky, V. Sos-
yura, N. Bazhan, O. Gonchar, Y. Smolich, M. Stelmakh, A, Maly-
shko, I. Vilde, L. Dmiterko, P. Kozlanyuk, I. Yura, N. Uzhviy, V.
Kasiyan, K. Dankevich, P. Virsky, I. Bokshai, N. Tamovsky, G.
Maiboroda, B. Antonenko-Davidovich, P. Maiboroda, M. Bozhiy,
E. Kirilyuk, B. Gmyrya, V. Ivchenko, D. PavUchko, D. Gnatjoik,
A. Pidsukha, V. Korotich, L. Kostenko, L. Rudenko, V. Chekanyuk.
Novosti Press Agency ( APN )
Mr. Pool. Representative Barry of New York.
STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT R. BARRY, U.S. REPRESENTATIVE
EROM NEW YORK
Mr. Barry. Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee, Ladies and
Gentlemen: Within the past month the outward calm that prevailed
on the world scene was shattered in a half dozen places. Revolts or
mutinies took place in Zanzibar, Kenya, Tanganyika, Uganda, and
Gabon. There was another coup in South Vietnam, and Castro acted
up again. De Gaulle recognized the Red Chinese, and the British
and ourselves agreed to disagree on trade with Cuba.
Now I do not contend that each of these events could have been
prevented, nor that all disagreements with our allies are necessarily
fatal. Wliat I do say, however, is that the machinery of United States
foreign policy is not geared to anticipate or prevent these outbreaks,
nor to exploit them to our advantage when they do occur. You will
note that as soon as this wave of mutinies hit Africa the tremor was
felt throughout the West — will Africa go Communist? Yet why
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1301
should this be? If there are areas of the world that are admittedly
unstable, why is it that the West, and the United States in particular,
must always be on the defensive, must always display anxiety at every
change in the status quo, lest it signalize a new gain for the Commu-
nists. Yet all too often these fears are justified, as seems to be the
case with Zanzibar, for example.
Newspaper reports indicate that the hard core of the revolutionary
military forces were Cuban- trained guerrillas, probably no more than
50 in number. Two of the leaders in the new government have long
pro-Communist records and affiliations, and pro-Communist subordi-
nates backstop the President and the Minister of Communications.
What a sad commentary this whole affair is. What a revealing
light it casts on the failure of the United States to deal effectively with
our Communist adversaries. Outmaneuvered once again, and not
even by the Russians or Chinese, but by the Cubans.
Even a cursory study of the world Communist apparatus will reveal
the reason for this. It lies in the fact that the Communists work at
revolution all the time, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year.
Political warfare is taught as a matter of course by all Communist
Party schools, at all levels, both within the Soviet bloc and in the free
world. Direction of all political warfare is coordinated through the
Central Committee of the Communist Party of the U.S.S.R. Now,
perhaps, the Chinese Communists may run a similar effort. At any
rate, the Soviet Union still runs a centrally directed effort, which
supervises a whole series of schools. These schools teach a party line
that reflects the thinking of Communist leaders as to the best ideology
to use at a particular time in a particular place. Various institutes,
such as the Institute of World Economics, analyze the economic sit-
uation of foreign countries with a view to exploiting any economic
difficulties for the benefit of the Communist movement. The Soviet
Academy of Sciences operates directly under the Council of Ministers
and is used for purposes of political warfare. All of the apparatus
of Soviet scholarship is essentially an instrument of Communist po-
litical theory and political penetration. And we are all familiar with
the Communist-front organizations, the peace societies, the friendship
committees, the art associations, and so forth, through which the
Communists seek to manipulate the gullible and convert the ignorant.
Students who go to Communist countries may find themselves used as
a source of intelligence. The Communists, in sliort, leave no stone
unturned. They are masters of "conflict management." They know
when to turn on trouble and how to exploit it and when to turn it off
if it serves their interests.
Contrast this with the American effort. True, thousands of foreign
students are in residence here. And AID trains thousands of foreign
technicians, while the Defense Department does the same for thousands
of foreign military personnel. But this effort, both public and private,
is conducted with no real coordination from the point of view of polit-
ical warfare.
Nor is it only foreign personnel who need instruction in this area.
We Americans are too often found wanting when we are asked sharp
questions about the defects in our own society or when we have to
explain democracy. When confronted by trained Communists we
are often ineffective, at times embarrassingly so.
30-471— 64— pt. 2 5
1302 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
There is one obvious remedy for this situation, one that Congress
lias considered before and one that deserves legislative approval.
That is the Freedom Academ;^. What would the Freedom Academy
be? It would be an institution that would offer a systematic and
complete curriculum on the theory and practice of the Communist
conspiracy and teach men and women how to defeat communism's
destinictive tactics and how to build strong, free societies. Courses
on communism are offered in some universities, but many offer little
or nothing in this area. If we are to conquer this enemy, we must
know him.
All of the social sciences would be brought to bear in the curriculum
of this Academy. A complete exposition and analysis of the Com-
muist system would be given. Then the problems of our own so-
ciety might be analyzed in equal depth, showing how we plan to make
it function better. This should be particularly useful to foreign
students, whose image of American democracy and free enterprise is
too often colored by the most narrow and outdated misconceptions.
The ethics and morality central to the democratic way of life would
be studied in depth. The ideological and organizational history of
the world Communist movement would be subjected to the closest
scrutiny. The problems that particularly concern emerging nations
would be given thorough consideration.
In addition to these theoretical studies, the Academy would be con-
cerned with the most practical questions. There would be courses
in the methods of combating international communism in the organi-
zational sense. The use of domestic political movements for our
purposes, rather than theirs, might be one subject of study. The tech-
niques of conflict management might be another.
In short, there is no reason for us to sit back and bewail the fact
that the Communists always seem to have the initiative on the world
scene. We need to go out and take the initiative. One instrument
for that purpose is surely the Freedom Academy. From it we should
be able to send forth a stream of young men and women from the
United States, from all the free world, and even (or perhaps especi-
ally) refugees from the world behind the Iron and Bamboo Curtains,
better equipped to explain our way of life, to defend the bases of our
society from intellectual attack, and, most of all, to advance the in-
terests of freedom in a positive, vigorous manner in those areas of
the world where the ultimate choice between freedom and slavery is yet
to be made.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to read the conclusion of the remarks
made in an article by Professor Hook entitled "Wliy The U.S. Needs
a Freedom Academy," which appeared in IBM magazine called Think.,
in September 1963.
Mr. Pool. Would you just as soon insert that in the record ?
Mr. Barry. I can insert it in the record. I would like to make refer-
ence to this article for the record, that if someone who is making a
further study of this issue would refer to page 10182 of the Congres-
sional Record of the 1st session of the 87th Congress.
Mr. JoHANSEN, This is Sidney Hook, is it not ?
Mr. Barry. This is true.
Mr. Pool. Mr. Barry, that was put in the record by Mr. Herlong?
Is that the one that you are referring to ?
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1303
Mr. Barry. It was a speech by Senator Mimdt.
Mr. JoHANSEN". It has been put in the record of these hearings al-
ready by Mr. Herlong.^
Mr. B.VRRY. Then my emphasis is merely to the last paragraph, but
since it is already in, I think that covers it sufficiently.
Mr. JoHANSEN. For the record, Mr. Chairman, you are a member
of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the House, Mr. Barry ?
Ml". Barry. Yes, sir.
Mr. JoHANSEN. I thinlc that is important to have as to the weight
of your support of this legislation.
Mr. Barry. Mr. Johansen, you might be interested to know that
this morning there was a hearmg in a subcommittee of the House
Committee on Foreign Affairs, and I put to one of the Assistant Sec-
retaries of State the question as to whether or not he felt there had
been a sufficient indoctrination of State personnel in the ideological
offensive that we as a people should conduct in order to win the cold
war. He said that there had been some improvement made during
the past few years since he had been an Assistant Secretary of State
having to do with this type of thing but he wished more could be
done.
Mr. Johansen. I wonder if he cleared his answer with Secretary
Harriman.
Mr. Barry. I, of course, would not want to get into personalities
on the matter with him. I have no knowledge whether he did or did
not. I think we are going more to the substance of the situation
rather than getting into any conflict, but I do think this: that from
him I learned that there was a great deal of room for improvement
within the State Department itself, inculcating within tliose peo])le
who are out fighting the cold war the need for us to have an ideologi-
cal offensive which we can only achieve through a concentrated study,
first, in knowing what we are up against and, secondly, establishing
something ourselves which we are positive about and selling it. This
is what we have to do in order to take a more aggressive role in the
ideological war. We have heard of a series of schools where the Com-
munists learn how to fight us, and we sit here without any concrete
course in how to effectively fight them. You call this a cold war. We
have a military establishment to train our Army. We have a mili-
tary establishment to train our Navy. We have one to train our Air
Force. We have nothing to train us in the field of fighting the cold
war. I do not mean to demean the fine educational institutions which
we have in the United States that do offer courses in explainmg what
communism is and in teaching what it does and how it has worked its
influence over the years. There is nothing to my knowledge in the
academic world that teaches a course in how to actively and successively
combat communism and its encroachment upon the free societies of the
Avorld.
Mr. IcHORD. Mr. Barry, I wish to commend you for a very fine
statement. Is the bill introduced by Mr. Hays providing for a Na-
tional Academy of Foreign Affairs pending in your committee ?
Mr. Barry. I think it is, yes.
Mr. IcHORD. What is the status of that bill ?
1 See part 1, pp. 955-961.
1304 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
Mr. Barry. We haven't reported it out. It has not come before the
full committee.
Mr. IcHORD. For the record, you approve of this Freedom Academy
approach rather than the approach called for in the Hays bill ?
Mr. Barry. Let me say this : Since I am not on the subcommittee I
have nothing to do with that bill ; I only have a preliminary view
which I am willing to give you now but which would not necessarily
be my final view after I heard all the testimony from the subcom-
mittee.
Mr. IcHORD. I would like to have your views on it. Really, I don't
think there is too much difference in the thinking of the proponents
of this bill and the thinking of the people in the State Department
who are pushing the National Academy of Foreig-n Affairs. Secre-
tary of State Harriman objected to the Freedom Academy on the
ground that we would be training, in his words, too many private citi-
zens. However, it was pointed out to him that private citizens could
also be trained in the National Academy of Foreign Affairs. Do you
think that is a valid objection ?
Mr. Barry. I would rather come forth with my own views rather
than commenting upon what testimony has been given today.
Mr. IcHORD. Before this committee, just general ideas about the
Freedom Academy.
Mr, Barry. Not having heard the gentleman this morning, I prefer
not to have to comment on his views, except to say this with respect to
the question you posed to me : One of the basic oppositions to the for-
mation of the Freedom Academy, as I understand it, has been that it
would conflict and cut into education.
Mr. IcHORD, That is right. Overlapping duties.
Mr. Barry. That is right. In my view, they would be nothing in
comparison to what they would be like if this other bill came out.
The other bill takes in the whole spectrum of foreign policy and has
that as its content. Wliereas, this bill is limited at least to the crea-
tion of an Academy to combat communism rather than in the general
field of foreign policy as such. To this extent, I have a preliminary
view but after the analysis and report comes up from the subcom-
mittee I feel that it may well be my considered judgment at that time.
Mr. IcHORD. What do you think about the informational center pro-
vided for in this bill ?
Mr. Barry. My view is that for this bill to succeed it should be
designed to stay out of the hair of a lot of agencies and have almost a
single purpose, namely, to educate people to combat communism.
When you get into the business of information centers, it presupposes
that it might represent the official policy of the United States and that
it might therefore interfere with State Department public affairs or it
might get into conflicts with CIA.
I am just not student enough of this phase of the bill to comment
specifically, but I would be fearful that if too much were made over
this phase of it that it would lose some of the effect that it has in
being a place where public officials or those aspiring to be public
officials, and especially those engaged in aid agencies. State Depart-
ment or CIA or anything having to do with security or information,
could go for a good, solid education in how to combat communism, how
to create an ideological offensive of our own that could win the cold war.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1305
Mr. IcHORD. Now this school could be run by the State Department,
or then it could be run by an independent agency as contemplated in
this bill. I take it that you are in favor of an independent agency to
have the responsibility of running the Academy.
Mr. Barry. I think that the bill would have to get further along
before I would know whether it should be an independent agency or
not. West Pomt is not an independent agency to the extent that the
Department of the Army does have some say over it. I would think
that this would have to be correlated to our State Department or it
would have a rough time.
Mr. IcHORD. I think there is a correlation in that we have the Advi-
sory Conimittee and members of the State Department or a member of
the State Department can be on the Advisory Committee. There
would be correlation to that extent.
Mr. Barry. My belief is that there must be real agreement here and
where you have too wide a disparity of opinion on this issue, where
those who don't want it at all and those who want it very, very much,
that somewhere down the middle may lie where this legislation will
ultimately rest. In that vein I would like to be a proponent of a
Freedom Academy to teach how to combat communism. If I had to
give up part of the bill in order to please someone, it would be the
information side of it that I would be willing to sacrifice. That does
not mean that it does not have good features, because I know tliat it
does.
Mr. Ichord. That is all.
Mr. Pool. Mr. Schadeberg.
Mr. Schadeberg. I have no questions.
Mr. Pool. Congressman Barry, we appreciate your appearing be-
fore this committee and giving us the benefit of your views. Particu-
larly since you are a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, it is
especially helpful to us.
Mr. Barry. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It has been a pleasure for
me, and I greatly appreciate this opportunity.
Mr. Pool. Our next witness will be Dr. William Kintner.
STATEMENT OE WILLIAM R. KINTNER
Dr. Kintner. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Pool. Doctor, will you give us a thumbnail sketch of your
background ?
I believe it will be helpful for the record.
Dr. Kintner. Thank you.
I think my background is pertinent to this investigation. I retired
from the Army after 21 years service in the grade of colonel in Septem-
ber lOfil. Prior to that time I had a range of duty both in the Army
and other departments of the Government which gave me, I think, a
fairly good ringside seat in how to wage the cold war. I had an o})por-
tunity to get a doctor's degree from. Georgetown University in 1948,
taught 2 years at Command and Staff College at Leavenworth. Sub-
sequently I was chief planner for a major activity in the Central In-
telligence Agency. I then went to the Korean war. I was infantry
commander at Pork Chop Hill. Later on I was negotiator at the
Panmimjon armistice negotiations after the truce was signed. I came
1306 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COIVIMISSION
back to Wasliiiigton and served in various capacities in the Army
Staff and as a Planning Board assistant to the National Security
Council.
In 1955 I was on the staff of Nelson Eockefeller when he was Spe-
cial Assistant to the President of the United States. I was head of
political and psychological activities in the office of Mr. Rockefeller.
Subsequently I was with the Operations Research Office, then served
in France with our military headquarters — liaison with the French
Government, and then came back to the Army General Staff. My
last assignment was chief of long-range plans in the Office of Chief
of Staff of the United States Army. I served at a fairly high level
and in fairly sensitive positions under three administrations, the last
2 years of President Truman's, during President Eisenhower's, and
the first year of President Kennedy's. Any remarks I am going to
make are completely nonpartisan in character.
In addition to my military career, I am a writer. I have written a
few books, the first is The Front Is Everywhere^ a study of Commu-
nist organization and technology; coauthor of Protracted Conflct^
and the recently published Neiu Frontiers of War, in collaboration
with Joseph Kornfedder, who is since deceased, a student at the Lenin
School for 3 years from 1928 to 1931. I point this out because some
people regard me as a little bit of an expert on communism. I would
like to disclaim that. The work I have done has only touched the
surface. I have never had the opportunity to have the type of research
support and backing, the totality of information w^liich would be
needed to do the job thoroughly. I will not mention the world situa-
tion, which in my opinion is not necessarily worki)ig out to our advan-
tage. Yet the purpose of such an Academy has to be responsive to our
understanding of which way the conflict is going. There are several
sciiools of thought: that we are on top or that the Comm.unists are
mellowing. The school of thought to which I belong contends that we
have a long, tough struggle ahead of us.
As I see the proposed Freedom Academy, it serves essentially three
major purposes: The first is that of research; secondly, is that of
training; and, thirdly, some kind of public dissemination of its
knowledge.
Now, on the research side I would like to point out and confirm what
other people have suggested that it is very difficult even w^hen you
are working in a university — I am currently professor of political
sciences at the University of Pennsylvania, deputy director of a re-
search institute there — to obtain specific infonnation on subjects that
are very pertinent to what we are trying to study. How are the
policies of various governments changing? What were the policies,
say, of Brazil 10 years ago, w^hat are they in '64? Wliat are the
influences that are brought to bear? One possible influence is the
Communist organization in that country, to cite just one country.
Do we know right now, among the 111-odd nations which have legal
Communist parties, what their strengths are? Wliat is the ratio of
visits from that countiy to the United States or some other free
world coimtry and to, on the other hand, the Soviet Union or Com-
munist China ? This type of information is very difficult to get hold
of.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1307
The last world survey on the Communist party strength is, I think,
3 or 4 years old. It is hard to obtain this information from the
Government. What is the newspaper situation on a worldwide basis ?
"What is the line which important papers in various countries follow ?
"W^iat news services do they use ?
For example, when Kenya became independent she subscribed to
Tass, why ? Because it is free for one thing — or because she wanted
to get a balance between, let us say, Reuters and the British service?
I don't know whether they could afford to subscribe to our two com-
mercial news services. This type of information is very pertinent to
an understanding of foreign policy and to our understanding of what
actions one might take.
Let us take a look at the Cypiiis development. I was in Cyprus in
'57. At that time it was evident that there was some connection
between the Cypriot movement and certain groups of Greek Com-
munists who were operating there. They had control of a very
powerful labor union, they also had the mayors of five major cities.
Tlie developments that have taken place in the last month or so
there are not the type of developments which could have been alto-
gether unanticipated.
I am not saying that anything could have been done better than
it has been done; I appreciate the efforts of Under Secretary of State
Ball to settle the issue, but there is something deeper in the Cypriot
situation than merely the Greek-Turkish antagonism. And the man-
ner in w^hich Mr. Khrushchev has moved in on the United Nations
discussions is indicative of that. The real question you have to face
on research material is. Does this information exist in the Govern-
ment? If so, can the private citizen obtain it if he needs it for his
own purposes?
Last year, for example, I tried to find out, in this case from the State
Department, a list of the training agencies of the Communist activiti-
ties inside Russia, Communist China, and the satellites, the type of
information which has been bandied about in this discussion. I asked
a very good friend of mine there. He said frankly this information
was not available in a concise form. Yet, to my mind, this is the kind
of operational information that I would at least have at my fingertips
if I were planning a strategy to deal with the people trained by these
Commimist institutions.
Mr. JoHANSEN. In other words, it wasn't unavailable because it was
classified ?
Mr. KiNTNER. No, they just had not thought this particular type of
information was particularly pertinent to their activity. They knew
a number of the Communist institutions. I am not suggesting they
were complet-ely ignorant about it, but to go aft-er this as a package
of information just had not been requested by any high officials.
Intelligence agencies generally respond to requests of officials whether
they are in the State, CIA, or the Defense Department.
I would also suggest that the private institutions in this country
really are unable to do the job.
I am fairly familiar with the university structure in this country.
I am familiar with most of the so-called think centers, and this par-
ticular area, namely, studies on the cold war or the nonmilitary aspects
1308 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
of our foreign policy, does not get the stress and backing that it sliould
have.
In the first place, there is a little matter of funding and financing.
Very few major foundations will put too much money into this activity.
They will put it into related activity, research studies, and matters of
that kind. But if you get down to saying you really want to explore
the cold war it is hard to get the money. This is a point, I believe,
that Mr. Harriman made, that there should he, backing in the private
research side.
As of now, in ni}^ opinion, the backing is inadequate. I do\il)t very
much if the private side, however, should take the responsibility for
this major area of conflict. I believe that it is interesting to note that
people in the other parts of the world feel somewhat the same way.
I have here a little statement called "Principles on Which the For-
eign Affairs Research Is Founded." This was published in London
by a group of private citizens. They made this statement :
It is regrettable that sucb a highly complex and controversial subject as
international political warfare should have to be left to private individuals and
organizations.
Now on the research side I would like to suggest that there has been
a basic need inside the Government to spend more time on what some
of the issues are that we are confronted with in the cold war. There
has been a reluctance sometimes to deal head on with these issues. I
helped to organize the structure of the Psychological Strategy' Board
in 1951. I was a member of something called the ideological panel.
We met for quite a long series of sessions. One project that we sug-
gested that might be developed was a study of the life of Stalin, to
show tliat he was pretty much the sort of person that Mr. Khrushchev
told the world he was in a speech to the Presidium in 1956.
This was shot down either because it wouldn't do any good or it
might be considered disruptive.
Mr. JoHANSBN. Might be disruptive?
Dr. KiNTNER. Yes.
Mr. JoHANSBN. Of what?
Dr. KiNTNER. Disruptive of the general approach to international
communism.
Mr. JoHANSEisr. Aggravate tensions, in other words.
Dr. KiNTNER. That, I think, is a fair summation of it.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Thank you.
Dr. KiNTNER. In the ideological panel, the issue of a positive Ameri-
can ideology never got off the floor. The story being that since oars is
a pluralistic society, it is very difficult for us to proje(^t the range and
complexity of our society. There happen to be a few principles in
our pluralistic society which, in my opinion, are worthj^ of at least
presentation to the rest of the world, the Declaration of Independence
and our form of constitutional Government. Nevertheless, it is argued
that it is difficult to develop a positive presentation of our ideology in
words and terms that would be meaningful abroad.
On the training side of the activity, we should recognize that the
Government agencies do undertake a significant amount of training.
I have lectured at all the War Colleges, the National, the Indr.strial,
the Army, NaA^y, Air Force, and so forth. I talked to the State
Department Foreign Service Institute, including the Senior Officers
PROVIDIXG FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COIVIMISSION 1309
Group. There is a good deal of work which does take place in tlie
field under discussion, but primarily these schools are designed to
produce professionals in their respective areas whether it happens to
be information, diplomacy, or the military arts. And what comes up
in this area is often treated marginally because it is not directly
germane to the central core of their activities.
I believe that was what Mr. Grant discovered when he took a look
at the key Government curriculum. There is a lot of good work there,
but on this particular held I would say it is relatively minimal com-
pared to the size and scope of the problem.
Now the private sector also conducts training. Perhaps you are all
familiar with the American Free Labor Institute in Wasliington,
run by the AFL-CIO, concentrating particularly on Latin America.
I happen to know the man who is running it. He is doing a first-rate
job, but it is very small compared to the problem. It only touches one
field of our numerous sets of relationships with Latin America. It
does not touch the educational field, business field, or other activities
of the private sector. There is in Costa Rica an outfit called the
Institute de Educacion Politica, which was set up by Jose Figueres
and supported by Betancourt. It was designed to do two things:
political actions against Communist subversion and, on the positive
side, the positive defense of prodemocratic principles. Some grad-
uates of this school were very helpful in Betancourt's successful defeat
of the Castro subversive terrorists during the recent election campaign.
In other countries you have the same issue. They tried to set up
political warfare training in Korea and the Philippines. There is a
committee on political warfare in France headed by Suzanne Labin,
a ver}^ professional group with no ax to grind. Yet none of these orga-
nizations receives public or private financing from their own countries
or the United States.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Would you see any objection to their receiving finan-
cial support from the United States ?
Dr. KiNTNER. I would see no oibjection whatsoever, but more im-
portant is the research support from the United States. We are deal-
ing with a global phenomenon and the phenomena we face in Venezuela
or Brazil or Zanzibar are pretty much the same. If there were one
central, higlily skilled, disciplined group trying to analyze this puzzle,
making it available to these groups, their own work could be enhanced
and we, of course, would get playback from them.
This raises the issue of the subject of training foreign personnel —
I believe, as it has been presented, it is a rather false issue. We are
training foreign personnel. We train them at our military schools,
not at the senior War Colleges but at the command and staff schools
level and down the line. These personnel do have access to classified
information. We are also training under the AID program; 5,766
participants from overseas were trained by AID in the United States
at the end of the last fiscal year and 2,127 were trained in the other
nations.
Mr. JoHANSEN. What area was that training in ?
Dr. KiNTNEH. In the AID program I assume. It is in economic
development.
Mr. JoHANSE^\ I mean the subject matter of the training.
1310 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
Dr. I^JNTNER. The subject matter, I assume, would have something
to do with irrigation projects, help to education, the secondaiy schools,
and so forth.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Not communism ?
Dr. KiNTNER, No, it is not in this field. I am pointing out that we
are training foreign personnel in other fields. I have been to the police
academy set up in the Canal Zone, again under AID auspices, where
we are training their military officers and police officers there in tech-
niques to combat subvei'sion that Mr. Harriman was discussing today.
In certain instances if the information is not classified at least we
have to tell them techniques to which we alone may be privy. So I be-
lieve if we can train foreign personnel in other activities that there
perhaps is a legitimate basis for training them in an area which may
be equally critical to our national survival.
Now on the public information question, there is no doubt in my
mind that the Government does have an obligation to tell the citizens
who are interested concerning important activities. There are hand-
outs put out by all the Government departments and agencies — De-
fense Department, State Department, Agriculture Department, and
what-have-you. In the foreign policy areas, I personally like to turn
to the Senate and House investigations, tlie Foreign Kelations Com-
mittee or the Foreigii Affairs Committee, one or the other, and the
Armed Forces Committee, because I find these committees provide the
most objective information you can get from the Government. The
bipartisan nature of a Freedom Academy would guarantee that you
would get the same degree of objectivity in the information it pro-
duced. I don't envisage a tremendous flow of handouts there, but
there ought to be a place where a person who is seriously interested
in the subject can go and have the information on which he places
credence — just like people in the academic world place credence in the
reports and findings of the congressional committees; they are highly
respected. I believe the same thmg should be done here.
Now another matter that is important is what the public needs to
know in order to sustain the will to fight on in this very difficult con-
flict. When the will is lost the battle turns against you. I was read-
ing today, for example, about the situation in Vietnam. Four ye^rs
ago, according to this article, when the American soldier went out in
the countryside the Vietnamese kids would wave at them and say
hello. Now, according to this article, appearing in today's Philadel-
'phia Inquirer^ the kids sometimes turn their backs. That to my mind
IS a psychological setback, assuming that the article is a valid report,
which is very, very disconcerting.
I would like to mention a type of problem which a Commission like
this could study, namely, the meaning of the sustained 3- to 4-year
campaign which the Communists have been conducting to degrade
the attitude of the American people toward their security agencies.
I am referring now to the Defense Department, the Central Intelli-
gence Agency, the State Department, and the FBI, for example.
There has been a series of books, I will cite a few, on the Defense
Department, the last year or so, which are rather interesting. The
latast one is Dr. Strangelove, or Flow to Fall in Love with the Bomb.
There are Seven Days in May., Fail-jSafe, and The Bedford Incident.
Interestingly enough, most of these books have a plot pretty nuicli the
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1311
same. Our civilian officials are portrayed as rather psychotic and our
military officials are outright l)arbarians. I do not know the motiva-
tion ol" the people who wrote the books or produced the movies, but I
do know that in 1959 Mr. Khrushchev stated that "\Ye (the Com-
munists) will learn to use the prudent representatives of the bour-
goisie." I think with careful research one might possibly find some
relationship between Mr. Khrushchev's thinking and certain of these
"end products" I liave mentioned. The Worker dated February 18,
1964, stated : " 'Dr. Strangelove' Blueprints Ultras' Push to Annihila-
tion." I do not know whether any department or agency of the Gov-
ernment is investigating this kind of issue. I haven't checked to find
out, but if this campaign erodes the subconscious attitude of millions
of American people toward the responsible security agencies of the
Government we will be in trouble.
I should point out that Seven Days in May sold 2 million copies.
That is a pretty good sale for a book. Now that the film is out, prob-
ably about 20 million Americans at least will see it. If Khrushchev's
campaign does have a purpose and if this security harpooning activity
does reflect his campaign, then if I were concerned with planning and
the defense of the United States I would like to look into it very
thoroughly. That, however, requires a very skillful type of analysis.
It requires a great deal of work before you can reach an objective con-
clusion on the matter.
There has been discussion during these hearings on the Government
attitude toward a Freedom Academy. I covered a few points of it.
One is that, of course, the pluralistic society really should not en-
gage the official instruments of Government to study something which
may be very controversial. There are very controversial aspects of
our attitude toward the conflict. Personally, however, I don't see how
we can avoid it.
The objection has been presented that if a cold war institute were
created and the Communists automatically dubbed the Freedom Acad-
emy as such, it would be very dangerous. The graduates of it w^ould
be branded as agents of the United States if they ever operated in a
foreign country. But that charge is now made against almost any
American-trained person if he goes back into a partially hostile en-
vironment, whether he simply "went to one of our universities or
whether he went to some Government-sponsored program.
The size of the program is of some interest. The State Department
proposal calls for a budget of some $6.5 million. The AID program
has an annual budget of some $40 million. Most of our big univer-
sities in this country which cover a multiplicity of subjects have budg-
ets anywhere ranging from 35 to 40 up to 100 million dollars. What
I am suggesting is that if the State Department proposal is designed
<-o fulfill the same purpose as the Freedom Academy, the scope of the
activity must be much larger than the degree of financial support re-
quested by State,
In summation, I would like to make these points. One is that the
Communist governments train operators to work in the private sec-
tors designed to erode the support of United States or other pro-West-
ern elements in a given country. The U.S. Government trains its
own personnel almost exclusively to work at the official level. The
U.S. private training in this field is, in my opinion, totally inadequate
1312 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
and the United States Government up to the present time does not
wish to engage in the private training.
Aft^r these general remarks I shall be very happy to respond to
any questions you may care to ask,
Mr. Pool. Dr. Kintner, it has been very helpful to the committee
for you to appear today. We appreciate it.
Mr. Ichord, do you have any questions ?
Mr. IcHORD. I have no questions, Mr. Chairman, but I do want to
commend Mr. Kintner for a very interesting and informative presen-
tation.
Dr. Kintner. Thank you, sir.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Colonel, I have a couple of questions.
You made reference to a proposal that was offered, and you were
interrupted at the time, which you said was shot down and rejected
because it was felt that it might be disruptive. Is there a possibility
that some of the opposition from certain quarters to this proposal, to
this proposed Academy and to the information center, is that some of
the information which it might promulgate might also be deemed to
be disruptive?
Dr. Kintner. I think tliere is a possibility of that. We have vari-
ous schools of thought on how to go about waging this struggle, and
there are some with genuinely good motivations who think it is best
to seek, as far as they can, some 7rhodu8 vivendi with the other side.
Consequently, they would not encourage any course of action which
might be regarded as provocative. I am not saying that is the official
position of the Government. I am merely indicating that some people
in the Government may have that attitude.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Now may I ask you if by any chance you are famil-
iar with, I think, the 1960 book, Cuba: Anatomy of a Revolution?
Dr. Kintner. Who is the author of that ?
Mr. JoHANSEN. Huberman and Sweezy.
Dr. Kintner. That was not the Reader's Digest article?
Mr. JoHANSEN. No. A pro-Castro book.
Dr. KiNTNEiR. I am not familiar with that.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Then I won't pursue it.
Mr. ScHADEBERG. Coloncl, I want to express my appreciation for
your being here. I ha\'e one question.
Would it be your considered opinion tliat if we had the Freedom
Academy that all of the agencies that would send our Government
personnel from this country to other countries should have some train-
ing in the Academy ?
Dr. Kintner. I don't think all personnel. As I suggested, there is
a very broad Government- wide training program for Government
personnel. Tliere is also what you might call a general orientation
training for Government personnel in this field. " I suspect that in
view of the pipeline requirements, the people being rotated from place
to place, that not all people could participate, particularly in a very
long program of training. Rut I would suspect that a high percent-
age of them might attend such an Academy were it established.
Mr. Schadeberg. You do not have to answer it if you don't want to.
Do you think our Pence Corps members, for instance, would be more
adequate in their type of work if they had some sort of training and
background ?
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1313
Dr. KiNTNER, I can't answer that question for the simple reason
tliat I know of no comprehensive review of the Peace Corps activities.
I am personally in favor of the Peace Corps idea, but I don't Imow
of any one who has really looked into it to see whether the Peace Corps
people in the field were able to handle themselves well against the type
of situations they would face. This might be another held of study
which an Academy such as proposed in this bill might undertake.
Mr. ScHADEBERG. Naturally, I think if anyone is working they are
working with people, and this might be a very helpful background for
someone working intimately with them.
Dr. KiNTNER. There has not been any private study that I know
of attempting to evaluate the Peace Corps. Of course it is fairly
young in life.
Mr. ScHADEBERG. Ycs, I Understand that.
Mr. JoiiANSEX. Mr. Chairman, without usurping your prerogatives
at all I would like to offer this observation, and direct it to the staff
of the committee, Mr. McNamara and the others as well as to our
chairman, Mr. Willis, that I think the witnesses that have been here
before this committee, almost without exception, have been the finest
aggregation of authorities in this field that I have been privileged to
hear in my 6 years of service on the committee.
Mr. Pool. I certainly do agree with the gentleman's observation.
Doctor, I want to thank you again for appearing here today.
Dr. KiNTNER. You are entirely welcome.
STATEMENT OF HON. BOB WILSON, U.S. EEPRESENTATIVE
FEOM CALIFOENIA
Mr. JoHANSEN. Mr. Chairman, our colleague. Congressman Bob
Wilson of California, who is a member of the Committee on Armed
Services, has submitted a statement. I ask that it be incorporated
at this point in the record of these hearings.
Mr. Pool. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(Congressman Wilson's statement follows :)
STATEMENT OF HON. BOP. WILSON, U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM
CALIFORNIA
Mr. Chairman, I am pleased that the committee has under consideration
several proposals to establish a Freedom Academy. I endorse this idea and
hope the Congress will pass the necessary legislation this session.
As you may be aware, Mr. Chairman, suggestions for a Freedom Academy were
first proposed in 1959 by our former colleague. Congressman Walter Judd of
Minnesota and by Congressman A. S. Herlong of Florida. Similar legislation
was introduced in the Senate at that time and has been reintroduced since
then.
In 19G0, the Senate passed a Freedom Academy bill shortly before the adjourn-
ment of the 86th Congress. When that bill was reported from the Senate
Judiciary Committee, it was enthusiastically supported by the committee, which
declared in a statement at the time :
"The committee considers this bill to be one of the most important ever
introduced in the Congress. This is the first measure to recognize that a con-
centrated development and training program must precede a significant improve-
ment in our cold-war capabilities. The various agencies and bureaus can be
shufiled and reshuflled. 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 intensively
1314 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
trained in the vast and complex field of total political warfare, we can expect
little improvement in our situation."
Mr. Chairman, I think that statement wraps up the need for this legislation
very well and in just a few sentences. We need, in our Government, an inde-
pendent, dedicated group, whose sole mission is to meet the challenge of commu-
nism head on. We do not need any more interlaced bureaucratic committees
and commissions.
Unfortunately, in spite of that strong endorsement from the Judiciary Com-
mittee and in spite of the fact that the bill did pass the Senate, the Congress
has yet to approve legislation for the establishment of a Freedom Academy.
I am aware that there is some opposition to this project by several of the de-
partments and agencies of our Government. I am sorry that they feel it neces-
sary to express their opposition. I am sorry, too, that we find it necessary
here to point up the deficiencies that exist in a complete attack on the philosophy
of communism. But I am convinced that there is a deficiency in our approach
to this enemy and I find it hard to understand that others, in positions of re-
sponsibility, don't see it.
As a member of the Armed Services Committee of the House, I am close to
much of the planning for the military defense of this country. I think, how-
ever, that there is more to our overall defense picture in these days of cold,
rather than hot, war than guns and missiles. For this reason, I am anxious
that this legislation be given a full and complete hearing and strongly urge the
committee to send it to the floor as soon as possible.
I am sure that it will receive the support of the overwhelming majority of our
colleagues at that time.
Mr. Pool. If there are no other witnesses and no other testimony,
we will adjourn. This will not complete the hearings; we will prob-
ably have some hearings at a later date.
(Wliereupon, at 3 : 50 p.m., Thursday, February 20, 1964, the com-
mittee recessed, subject to the call of the Chair.)
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 2
TUESDAY, APRIL 7, 1964
United States House of Representatives,
Committee on Un-American AcTivmES,
Waskington^ D.G.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
The Committee on Un-American Activities met, pureuant to recess,
at 10 :10 a.m. in Koom 304, Cannon House Office Building, Washing-
ton, 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 H. Ichord,
of Missouri ; August E. Johansen, of Michigan ; Donald C. Bruce, of
Indiana; and Henry C. Schadeberg, of Wisconsin.
Staff members present : Francis J. McNamara, director ; Frank S.
Tavenner, Jr., general comisel ; and Alfred M. Nittle, counsel.
The Chairman. The committee will come to order, please.
Today, the Committee on Un-American Activities resumes hearings
begun on February 18 of this year on various bills to create a Free-
dom Commission and Freedom Academy.
In my introductory remarks to the February 18 hearings, I pointed
out that five such bills, H.R. 352, H.R. 1617, H.R. 5368, H.R. 8320, and
H.R. 8757, introduced repsectively by Representatives Herlong, Gub-
ser, Boggs, Taft, and Schweiker, had been referred to the committee.
Since that time, three additional Freedom Academy bills have been
introduced by Members of the House and referred to the committee.
They are H.R. 10036, by Mr. Ashbrook, a member of this committee,
introduced on February 20; H.R. 10037, by Mr. Clausen, also intro-
duced on February 20 '; and H.R. 10077, by Mr. Schadeberg, also a
member of this committee, on Februaiy 24."
Mr. Clausen's bill is substantially the same as the Boggs and Taft
bills. Mr. Ashbrook's and Mr. Schadeberg's bills are identical with
the Gubser bill.
The primary difference between the Boggs-Taft-Clausen and the
Gubser- Ashbrook-Schadeberg bills is that while the former provide
an Advisory Committee to the Freedom Commission made up of rep-
1 For copies of above bills see Appendix A, part 1, pp. 1111-1174.
1315
1316 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
resentatives of executive branch departments and agencies, the latter
provide for a Joint Congressional Freedom Committee to advise and
oversee the operations of the Commission.
STATEMENT OF HON. HOBEET C. HILL
The Chairman. The Honorable Robert C. Hill, former Assistant
Secretary of State for Congressional Relations and Special Assistant
to the Under Secretary of State for I^Iutual Security Affairs and
also former U.S. Ambassador to Costa Rica, El Salvador, and
Mexico, was to be the first witness this morning. Unfortunately,
unforeseen business matters have made it impossible for him to be
here. He has therefore written a letter to me which I will now read
for the record.
The letter is dated April 3, 1964. It reads as follows :
My dear Mr. Chairman : I appreciate very mucli the invitation to testify before
your Committee on April 7. 1964, in behalf of the important legislation which
would establish a Freedom Academy. Unfortunately, since accepting your invita-
tion, business commitments make it impossible for me to be in Washington for the
hearing. I am, therefore, asking you to submit my letter to your Committee, and
hope that it will be incorporated in the records of the Committee in support of
the Freedom Academy.
As you may know, Mr. Chairman, I have had ten years of government service.
I began in India as a Vice Consul, was later Clerk of the Senate Committee on
Banking and Currency, and from 1953 through 1960 served as United States
Ambassador to Costa Rica, El Salvador, and Mexico, and as Assistant Secretary
of State for Congressional Relations. During that time, I have observed the
lack of knowledge of government officials, and private citizens, with regard to
understanding communism and its dangers to our democratic way of life. I
have also noted the lack of understanding on how to deal with the communist
problem once it has developed.
Today, four years after leaving government service, my office in New Hamp-
shire has continuous inquiries from friends in foreign countries, as well as from
private citizens in the United States, asking for advice on how to inform and
prepare people for the struggle against communism. A case in point has been
the recent turmoil of communist activity in Brazil, which fortunately has led
to the ousting of Goulart. Recently, I made appointments for two friends of
mine from Brazil to meet with Thomas Mann, the able Assistant Secretary of
State for Inter-American Affairs. I knew that from this Foreign Service
officer they would receive advice and not be brushed off or discouraged.
This is not always the case, as shown by my own experience when the Em-
bassy in Mexico tried vainly to warn the government of the United States, from
1957 until 1960, of the dangers of Castro and his association with communism.
You may say that these two instances are far afield from the legislation be-
fore you. I do not think so. In my opinion, if the Freedom Academy had
been in existence, and the opinions of experts had been used to analyze the
developments in Cuba, Castro would be elsewhere today, and Goulart would
have been spotted long before he assumed power in Brazil. As your Committee
well knows, the Federal Bureau of Investigation had repeatedly warned the
Department of State about Castro and his communist associations long before
he came into power. With the support of the Freedom Academy, in alerting
the United States, the present hemispheric tragedy could have been averted.
I support wholeheartedly the concepts of the Freedom Academy. I congratu-
late the authors of the bill, and your Committee for its continued interest in
winning the struggle against communism.
Respectfully,
/s/ Robert C. Hill.
Mr. Tuck. Mr. Chairman, I know that there has been quite a bit of
favorable editorial comment in regard to the subject of our studies at
this time, but there appeared an editorial favorable to the establish-
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1317
ment of a Freedom Academy in the Richmond T iines-Bispatcli of
Richmond, Virginia, mider date of March 25, 1964.
In view of the prominence and importance of that paper and in
view of the distinction that the learned editor, Mr. Virginius Dabney.
has attained in the literary world as well as in other facets of our life
more important to the Nation, and in view of his high standing all
over the country, I would like, if it is not inappropriate, to offer this
editorial as a part of the record, and I do so offer it.
The Chairman. I read that editorial and was very much impressed
with it. I am glad that you offer it for the record, and it will be
received at this point.
(The editorial follows :)
[From the Richmond Times-Dispatch, Mar. 25, 1964]
To Win the Cold War
Establishment by the federal government of a Freedom Academy which would
be charged with training Americans In the vitally important non-military aspects
of the cold war, thus matching the Communists at their own game, is once more
a real possibility.
Legislation to set up such an institute wherein to teach the strategy of propa-
ganda and the tactics of political warfare died in the House last year, after pass-
ing the Senate. Similar bills have recently been reintroduced in both branches.
Sponsorship of the Senate bill illustrates the nonpartisan character of those
advocating a Freedom Academy. Among the conservative sponsors may be men-
tioned Senators Dodd, Goldwater and Lausche, while from the liberal camp come
such men as Senators Douglas, Scott and Keating.
The lack of such an academy may be a major cause for the steady advance of
the Communists across the face of the globe in the past few decades. The Soviets
and the Red Chinese have been at the business of stimulating "nationalistic
revolutions" and overthrowing governments through guerrilla warfare, rather
than by frontal attack, for some 40 years.
If we are to have any real hope of checkmating them, we should embark upon
some such counteroffensive as the Fi*eedom Academy provides.
The newly introduced bill is phrased, necessarily, in fairly general terms. The
title reads as follows :
"To create a Freedom Commission and the Freedom Academy, to conduct re-
search to develop an integrated body of operational 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 understand and implement this body of knowledge. . . ."
The Freedom Commission would be composed of seven full-time appointees of
the President, subject to Senate confirmation. They would be charged with the
duty of establishing and supervising the Freedom Academy. "Such- sums as may
be necessary" are authorized to be appropriated.
If we had had such an academy yeai-s ago, we might not be on the defensive
today before the Communist guerrillas and saboteurs in so many areas of the
world. Establishment of this institution, or something like it, would seem to be
essential to final victory for the West in the desperate struggle in which it is
engaged.
The Chairman. And along the same vein, the cartoon from the
Nexo York. Herald Tribune of Wednesday, February 12, 1964, was
called to my attention, and although it was not intended to have any-
thing to do with these hearings, yet it is, I tliink, a good illustration
of the success achieved by Communists through their political war-
fare schools — training in tactics, and so on.
The cartoon is titled "Hail Alma Mater." It was published at the
time of the pro-Communist takeover in Zanzibar. A fire, labeled
"Chaos in Africa," is portrayed as haAdng been set in the background.
30-471— 64— pt. 2 6
1318 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
In the foreground are two men, shaking hands. One, bearded, is
holding a torch that apparently was used to set the fire. He says to
the man whose hand he is shaking: "I was trained in Cuba, Class
of '64!" The other character, holding a suitcase of dynamite in his
left hand, says about his Alma Mater: "I'm Moscow '63 !"
So, here they are; they are taking credit for the chaos in Africa.
That is the meaning of preparation, from their point of view and for
their purposes, in agitation, and so on. We don't seeni to have any
active countermeasures here, or certainly no institutions where we can
get expert instruction on their techniques and how to defeat them.
Would it be possible to reproduce this in the record at this point ?
Mr. McNamara. It would, Mr. Chairman ; yes.
The Chairman. Well, I offer it.
(The cartoon follows:)
iiaii Aima xiiater
J
'■,y
r\
i, ~/
r L WAS TRAi;4SP ; "< ^' ~'^
CLAssopt^j iU/AOSCOW
.i«aiifiiu^jft>.ig)^
'~ *'" _ ( ^ " ,
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1319
The Chairman. Our first witness this morning is Mr. Eobert F.
Delaney, former USIA official.
Mr. Delaney ?
Mr. Delaney. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Mr. Delaney, we are delighted to have you, and as
the usual point of beginning, I wish you would give a thumbnail ex-
planation of your education, your background, and your experience
and employment, in a general way.
Mr. Delaney. Yes, sir.
STATEMENT OF ROBERT FINLEY DELANEY
Mr. Delaney. I attended Dartmouth and Holy Cross Colleges, and
did my graduate work at Boston University, Harvard, Catholic Uni-
versity, and the University of Vienna, concentrating in the fields of
political sociology and international relations.
I have served in the United States Navy on active duty over a period
of 6 years. I am currently a commander in the U.S. Naval Reserve.
My professional experience includes some 12 years in the U.S. For-
eign Service, both within the Department of State and the U.S. Infor-
mation Agency.
I have served in our Embassy in Rome, Legation in Budapest,
Embassies in Vienna and in El Salvador, Central America.
At the present moment, I am engaged in writing and lecturing on
international affairs.
I have also served as a public affairs adviser to industry.
At the moment I am a resident of Miami, Florida, although I spend
much of my time in Latin America.
The Chairman. I think you have contributed to a paper Studies
in Guerilla Warfare?
Mr. Delaney. Yes, sir.
My experience, in terms of the international Communist conspiracy,
has been directed toward unconventional warfare. I have written
several books that bear on this subject, among them : This is Convmunist
Hungary^ The Literature \of G ommunism in America^ A Training
Manual on Unconventional Warfare, and Studies in Guerilla War-
fare.
The Chairman. Now, we are glad to receive your comments on the
bills.
Mr. Delaney. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen: I have prepared a statement this
morning, which I hope will be enlarged with questions from the com-
mittee upon its completion and, if I may, I should like to read it at
this time.
I appear before you today as a private citizen and ex-Government
official to support passage of the Freedom Academy bill. Since 1949,
I have been engaged in exposure of the Communist conspiracy, first in
Europe and more recently in Latin America.
I feel a particular moral commitment to testify before this com-
mittee, since I was one of the officials in the Operations Coordinating
Board who confronted Mr. Alan Grant in July 1954 and found no
particular merit in his original plan.
I am here today
1320 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
The Chairman. What was that plan ?
Mr. Delaney. That was the original idea of the Freedom Academy,
drawn up by the Orlando Committee, stated in 1954.
The Chairman. All right.
Mr. Delaney. I am here today to tell you that 10 years and two
continents later, I urgently agTee with the necessity for the establish-
ment of an Academy dedicated to the needs of a national program in
teaching, training, and research in order better to comprehend the
spectrum of Communist weaponry which opposes and, seemingly, so
often befuddles us.
I have served both in the public and the private sectors. I am, I
believe, the first witness to testify with extensive experience in both
areas. I would like this morning to limit my remarks to two prin-
cipal considerations, since earlier witnesses, notably Mr. Grant and
Dr. Possony of the Hoover Library, have expressed, significantly bet-
ter than I, many of my present ideas drawn from my overseas ex-
periences.
The first area I would touch on is the matter of the need for a com-
mon national institution as envisioned by this proposed legislation
for a Freedom Commission and Freedom Academy.
My second concern involves inclusion of the private sector in the
training and research aspects of the Academy.
Permit me, gentlemen, to touch on my first point: The need for
a common, umbrella-type institution. Earlier testimony has alluded
to official opposition to this bill, notably from the Department of State,
on the gTOunds that the work was being done already or that it was
a dangerous initiative which might infringe on our relations in the
world.
Let me be very blunt. It is my observation that the main reason
for official opposition is basically jurisdictional. No official executive
agency enjoys being told it is deficient. No official agency enjoys being
charged with outmoded thinking. Yet, this, in effect, is what the Free-,
dom Commission concept is suggesting. And it is correct in its as-
sessment.
Our line agencies of foreign policy developed their methodology
out of an era long departed. Commimist conflict management, as Pro-
fessor Possony so aptly describes the Soviet system of international
relations, finds no counterpart in the conventional and formalized
attitudes and techniques of our traditional service.
Nonetheless, the Department of State must, properly so, maintain
its primacy, in our system, in the conduct of foreign affairs. Here is
the rub. This primacy is being carried out without sufficient regard
for change. We live in a revolutionary world. We deplore the ill-
mannered and wholly unconventional diplomatic practices of the Sino-
Soviet bloc.
But, gentlemen, as we all laiow, these tactics exist, and we are
forced — I repeat, forced — to deal with them. It may be unfortunate,
but it is true.
As a result, the primacy of State has slowly eroded over the years,
since 1948. Propaganda, intelligence, narcotics, trade, fiscal manipu-
lations, and now counterinsurgency have all entered the semantics
of diplomacy. History tells us these techniques exist, but tradition
tells us, "isn't it a shame?"
PROVIDING FOR CREATIOX OF A FREEDOM COMAIISSION 1321
Agencies liave sprung up to cope with the emergencies of cold war —
and properly so. They have tilled a vacuum. All of these ellorts
represent pioneer attempts to fight the Communist threat. To these
developments State has agreed, realizing its right of policy control.
Now comes another idea, fostered by the demands of the age in which
we live — the Freedom Academy. The concept is practical. Let us
train people in and out of Government to a fuller realization of what
we are up against. Ten years ago, I thought the idea was farfetched.
Today, after witnessing Hungary, Cuba, attempted coups in Latin
America, and massive naivete in our own society, I plead for the
Academy concept.
State, perhaps naturally, sees this idea as further erosion of its
prerogatives by a group of the uninitiated. It does not wish to accept
further bureaucratic encroachment. After all, do we not, as testi-
mony has indicated, possess sufficient training academies throughout
the Government? 1 know; I have been to most of them. I can say
this : We lack coordination ; we lack conmiunality. We lack perspec-
tive and completeness.
An attache is trained; a diplomat is schooled; a propagandist is
equipped. Each in his own specialty, each as a "necessary waste of
time" before proceeding to his post.
Because this field of the Communist unconventional approach
happens to be my experience, I have been fortunate. But I have
heard officers complain about the "cops and robbers," waste-of-time
internal security courses. I have heard diplomatic officers criticize
colleagues who were trying to fight the Communists with the new
techniques. I have seen our officials care more for protocol than for
labor, more for form than content, and more for the system than the
fight we face, unorthodox though it may be. Indeed, it may very
well be that this unorthodoxy is the key. Change comes slowly to
foreign policy. The "Maginot Line" mentality is comfortable, and
the way up assured. But, gentlemen, the opposition thinks otherwise,
and it is they, unfortunately, who force the pace.
Now, the Department feels negatively about an independent admin-
istration of this Academy. My experience has been that the strong
point of the act rests in its quasi-autonomy. It will be subject, thus, to
the common good of the United States, and not to the fears, negativism,
and inflexibility of established, jurisdictionally minded executive
agencies.
For once, gentlemen, let us take the word of the Communist move-
ment at its worth. Let us give the American people the benefit of the
doubt. Let us show our own appreciation of the Communist method-
ology and study it objectively and fully with this the object in view,
rather than to create another watered-down monument to incomplete
training for bored Government officials.
I don't mean to denigrate Government officials. On the contrary, I
was a very proud member of the club myself. I am simply commenting
that it is insufficient training to which they have been exposed.
My second point is this: The United States of America, not just a
cadre of foreign policy officials, is in competition with the world Com-
munist movement. In fact, the free world is its target, as the bloc so
frequently and honestly indicates.
1322 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
Yet for every moderately trained U.S. official conscious of the threat,
there is a private-sector counterpart who, through ignorance or lack
of training, often undoes the good "our man in Country X" may be
attempting to accomplish.
How often have you seen or heard, Mr. Chairman, of an xlmerican
teacher or an American businessman or an American expatriate abroad
or, for that matter, an American official who confuses the local national
with "a Commie, Socialist, pinko"? Even worse, I can relate ex]H'ri-
ence upon ex[)erience of Americans abroad who hate their Embassies,
who rant at U.S. policy, and who have not the vaguest idea of the
•aison d'etre for the revolutionary ferment sweeping the developing
nations, not to mention their simplistic views of the Communist
problem.
These men are basically good Americans. They serve well and faith-
fully, but they need assistance. They have never been given the true
opportunity quietly to listen, study, question, and read about the
Communist forces at work in their world of business, commerce, en-
trepreneurship, or academic life.
For these men, as well as for the men coming up — the overseas-
bound manager, the newly rotated expatriate, the inquisitive jour-
nalist, the international engineer- — this Academy and its curriculum
could be invaluable.
This country needs these men who are on the international front
lines. "VVe should not waste them. The Freedom Academy, contrary
to criticism, will not breed conformity or party line in such training.
Rather, it is to be hoped it will provide this country with a reservoir of
intelligent, knowledgeable men who will understand the forces at work
attempting to subvert and ultimately destroy the world that they, the
overseas Americans, now numbering close to 2 percent of our national
population, are trying to build.
Finally, may I allude briefly to examples of the unconventional tech-
niques with which we are faced today by the Communists — techniques
which would surely be included in the Academy's curriculum, as Dr.
Possony outlined in his testimony.
For the past 4 years, I have lived and traveled in Latin America, a
subcontinent under frantic Communist pressure.
I have seen universities completely dominated by a handful of pro-
fessional Communist students, who have paralyzed the normal col-
legiate functions. Now, this technique, once understood, is easily
countered if the university officials are fully appreciative of what is
going on and what is at stake.
By the same token, I have seen U.S. Army officers trained in civic
action antagonize nationalistic university officials whom they were sent
to help, by inexcusable lack of tact and prudence. Proper training
could have avoided this type of situation.
In Latin America today, the Communists are employing every
teclinique possible. During the Panama riots, for example, docu-
mented evidence indicates the provocative role played by Communist
street agitators, even to the apparent extreme of Panamanians shoot-
ing their fellows in order to provide a convenient, exploitable martyr
who could be buried amidst suitable antigringo harangues.
Now, \'.here do these trained Communist agents come from? We
all know I hat Cuba, Communist China, and the Soviet satellites share
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1323
the burden. In Cuba, we have the word of an official publication,
Cuha Sockd/sta, wliich admits to more than 269 cadre training schools
on that small island, designed to, in the review's words, "train tech-
nical and cultural cadres who will be with the revolution and for the
revolution, all the way."
Mr. Pool. Pardon me just a second there.
How many did you say there were in Cuba ? How many schools 'i
Mr. Delaney, Two hundred sixty-nine.
Now, that is probably an outdated figure, but it gives you some
idea of the scope and immensity of their approach.
I would like, incidentally, to submit as part of the record, if I may,
Mr. Chainnan, the complete article from which I extracted this in-
formation, called "Revolutionary Training Schools and the Training
of Cadres," by Lionel Soto — S-o-t-o — translated from Cuha Social-
ista.
The Chairman. The document will be received for our files, and
we will decide whether to incorporate it in full in the record later.^
Mr. Delaney. The Chinese Communists, not to be outdone, have
since 1958 operated a "school for training special agents," a school,
cynically enough, under control of the Minister of Social Affairs
The Chairman. Where is that school ?
Mr. Delaney. It is located in mainland China, sir.
This school, according to U.S. Government sources, has sent three
quarters of its graduates to Latin America: Havana, Mexico, Vene-
zuela, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, and Uruguay.
At the end of the line, the Chinese have been very carefully prepar-
ing the groundwork and have, to date, formed some 22 so-called friend-
ship associations, which can feed potential cadre material into this
revolutionary people's school system.
Now, mind you, I think one of the most interesting points is the
fact that the Chinese Communists do not enjoy diplomatic relations,
generally speaking, in Latin America, and yet they are able to estab-
lish this system of unconventional diplomacy, if you will, or warfare,
more probably, and we are not effectively able to counter it, primarily
because our approach is more formalized than our opponent's.
The Chairman. Let me ask you two questions in one.
Mr. Dei^ney. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Accepting, of course, the complete accuracy of
your last two statements, is it an easily established fact that these
schools in Cuba exist and that one in China exists ?
Is that known to the Government?
Mr. Delaney. Yes ; it is known to the Government.
The Chairman. I was about to ask you the source, unless you don't
want to say.
Mr. Delaney. Perfectly free.
This is a U.S. Joint Publications Research Service, Photoduplica-
tion Service of the Library of Congress, the translator and repro-
ducer of the article.
The Chairman. And the other?
Mr. Delaney. The other is taken from a USIA publication.
1 For text of Soto article, see pp. 1333-1341.
1324 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
The Chairman. Oh, so that source is USIA ?
Mr. Delaney. For the Chinese friendship associations ; yes, sir.
The Chairman. All right.
Mr. Delaney. I ask you to note one dominant aspect of this training
in proletarian diplomacy. It is coordinated. It functions for the bene-
fit of supporters, both public and private; and, according to Cuban
Communist Lionel Soto, the author of this previously cited article,
"The schools must constantly incorporate the live materials and docu-
ments that reflect our development * * * ."
History in the making.
These schools are not confined to Commmiist-controlled countries.
As far back as 1958, the Argentine police uncovered a completely
equipped propaganda and subversive training academy in Buenos
Aires, known as the Aurora Latin American Training School for
Communist Party Cadres. This will shortly be exposed in popular
print in the form of a book to be published by Readers Digest
Editor Gene Methvin.
Discovered in attendance at this school were Latin Americans, Ital-
ians, Spaniards, and a Pole; among them lawyers, professors, blue-
collar and white-collar workers.
Now, I cite these examples not to suggest that we set up a clandestine
operation. I cite these examples to bring home the necessity for a
research training institute which will prepare our officials and our
business and academic men in the unorthodox and unconventional
methods of our enemies.
It is precisely because the Communists are nonconventional in their
nonmilitary tactics that we need a high-level, nondiplomatic school.
Mr. Johansen. May I interrupt you at that point ?
Mr. Delaney. Yes, sir.
Mr. Johansen. Am I to understand that, as of now, there is no
countereffort directed by our Government against these activities?
Mr. Delaney. No, sir ; there are efforts directed against these activi-
ties by the professionals within the executive branch. The informa-
tion obviously collected exposing these Communist activities is
generally subjected to scrutiny and analysis and, I dare say, to what-
ever efforts can be worked against them to blunt their effectiveness. I
think that the great gap lies in the general public awareness and
consciousness vis-a-vis this assault that is being directed against us.
We must not overlook the strength inherent in our own noncon-
ventional sector — the private one. In Colombia, in Peru, in Venezuela,
American businessmen today, for example, have joined together to
launch community development projects, miiversity civic action pro-
grams, and well-conceived scholarship plans designed to reach these
groupings of campesino,^ students, and intellectuals who are them-
selves the object of Communist subversion.
-T believe that Mr. Morrison will be speaking to you a little later
this morning on one other aspect of the private sector's contribution,
"Operation Amigo."
By bringing individuals together into a Freedom Academy, we can
increase our knowledgeability, our effectiveness, and our sense of
prudent action ; and I am emphasizing prudent action, because there
1 Peasant farm laborers, nonlandowning farmers.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1325
are many people who fear this concept of a Freedom Academy,
because they think that if passed, if brought into being, it will end
up as an extremist institution with everybody running off at the
mouth, declaring war, or interfering in the due and orderly processes
of the executive branch of Government.
Not at all. This is not the intention, as I read the bill, nor must
it ever be, or we sow the seeds of our own destruction.
We do not have an across-the-board response today. Of this, there
is no doubt. Creation of a well-concei^-ed Freedom Academy would,
in my opinion, be the catalyst which would restore ingenuity, in-
ventiveness, and sense of belonging to our own efforts to cope with
Communist unconventional activities.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen.
The Chairman. Well, I would sa}' you made a very splendid state-
ment and I congratulate you.
Gentlemen ?
Mr. Tuck. Mr. Chairman, I would like to commend Mr. Delaney
for his fine statement and for the very helpful information which
he has brought to the committee.
Mr. Delaney. Thank you very much.
Mr. Pool. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask him one question.
In the Chinese situation, do you have any information on how
many of these schools they have in China ?
Mr. Delaney. No, sir; I can't quote you an accurate figure, un-
fortunately. I think we can be sure that there are literally hundreds
of them, however.
Mr. Pool. You have 269 schools in Cuba, and these are mainly used
for training propagandists, guerrillas, agitators, and for softening
up of students who, let's say, would not be called Communists as of
the point they arrive on the island.
Did I understand you a while ago to say in your testimony that
three fourths of the graduates of this Cliinese school for training
special agents that was under the Ministry of Social Affairs, that
three fourths of those graduates go to South American countries?
Is that what you said ?
Mr. Delaney. Yes, sir.
Mr. Pool. Do you have a basis for that? Is that in this USIA
report ?
Mr. Delaney. Yes, sir.
Mr. Pool. You don't know the number of that, do you?
Mr. Delaney. The only documentation-cited number that would
be able to label it is USIA 1961. I suspect that this is probably the
year in which this documentation was first issued.
Mr. Pool. Thank you.
The Chairman. Mr. Ichord.
Mr. Ichord. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Now, you say, Mr. Delaney, that you were opposed to the original
concept as advanced by the Orlando Committee.
I would like to ask you whether the concept of the Orlando Com-
mittee has changed, or whether your thinking has changed?
Mr. Delaney. My thinking, sii-. I think the concept is
Mr. Ichord. You said "the original concept." The concept is still
the same.
1326 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
Mr. Delaney. Yes; so what I actually meant was that — there have
been certain details that have been modified over the years, but it is
basically my own thinking that has changed, rather than that of
the Orlando Committee.
Mr. IciiOED. A number of years ago, Senator Young from Ohio
made a speech on the Senate floor wherein he ridiculed the Freedom
Academy on the ground that we already had enough institutions
teaching essentially the same thing that would be taught in this
school.
Are you familiar with the speech that he made? I would like
to have your comment.
Mr. Delaney. I have no doubt but what there are sufficient schools
in the Government as of the present moment that, spread out over geog-
raphy and continent, at one point or another, partially cover the field.
But it is fragmented and isolated, and to my knowledge the school
system does not give a coherent, complete, and accurate picture, nor
does it give training in depth, such as you might find in one of the
service academies devoted exclusively to the staff training of military
officers, where they are able to spend 6 to 9 months or more training
specifically in depth for higher command.
Mr. IciiORD. How do you envisage this institution working ?
Mr. Delaney. I envision this as a graduate program of instruc-
tion— let's just confine it to instruction at the moment — whereby people
may be assigned for a definite period of time, and there to study, to
the exclusion of everything else, the nature, the antecedents, the tech-
niques, and the tactics of the world Communist movement.
Mr. IciiORD. Won't they even go farther than that — and also means
of combating ?
Mr. Delaney. Yes, sir ; and I would tie that aspect of the question to
the research function. It is in the research function that you would
develop the counter ideas, where you would develop the necessary
knowledgeability for pushing expert individuals out into the main-
stream of our public and private sectors to combat the enemy.
Mr. loHORD. Wliat is your objection to having the Academy operated
by one of our existing institutions of Government, for example, the
State Department? Why do you object to the State Department
operating such an agency ?
Mr. Dei^ney. I think, basically, that the State Department, because
it is the State Department and responsible for the traditional and for-
mal channels of communication in our diplomatic sphere, would be put
in an embarrassing position, in terms of the world at large, in setting
up such a training academy.
Secondly, I believe that the State Department would be beset by
pressures within its own organization to wat^r down the training and
the courses so offered. I think there would be a lack of, shall we say,
nonconformity. I think there might be — I can conceive of situations
where academic freedom might be restricted for particularly practical
reasons of statecraft, and I think that, over a period of time, there
would be a great deal of pulling and tugging within the executive
branch for control of this or that aspect of the Academy.
What I am suggesting is that it would be easier to create an Academy
outside the framework of established executive agencies. It would be
a new departure and would not inherit the various difficulties, fights,
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1327
and squabbles that might very well be transplanted to an Academy
m State's jurisdiction.
Mr. IciiORD. Of course, this will be another executive agency. The
mere fact that it is independent doesn't remove it from the executive.
Mr. Delaney. No ; that is quite true, but it will come to its functions
with a clear mind and with a will to be one in terms of its legislative
function, and I believe that it will have a better chance to do the job
as indicated in the legislation.
Mr. IcHORD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Well, let me ask one question.
As the other side of the coin that you have just been referring to,
you don't envisage, do you, that this Academy would have anything to
do with, or supplant, the State Department in matters of foreign
policy?
Mr. Delaney. Not at all, sir. That would be a grievous mistake.
It has no function in that area.
The Chairman. Well, now, accepting that, because that is our
understanding— the only acceptable function would be in that direc-
tion— would there be involved some danger that is real, that despite
the fact that such would not be the objective of the Academy, that it
miglit be portrayed as such to foreign countries and that, therefore,
efforts would be made to create turmoil and quarrels between State and
the agency, and could the agency survive that?
Perhaps efforts would be made in our own country to "take the
side" of the Academy as against State and, therefore, even though it
isn't so as a matter of law, the people would think so and, therefore,
the very existence of the Academy might be used as a lever for more
trouble.
What is your thought as to that ?
Because I assume this is the sort of thing — and I'm attributing
nothing but sincerity to people — that might be troubling the State
Department in its objection to this proposal.
Mr. Delaney. To answer your first question first, Mr. Chairman,
I think that if the legislation passes and is enacted into law, we can
absolutely count on a barrage of propaganda directed against its
existence on the part of the Commimists. You will recall that the
same type of massive attack was launched against the United States
escapee program when it first came into being, a program which was,
through its entire history, a humanitarian effort, and yet it was sub-
jected to the strongest possible attack by the Communists. The Corn-
munists don't want the Academy established, obviously, because it
means people will be more alert.
Insofar as our own country is concerned, I am also quite sure in my
own mind that it would be subject to attack, perhaps misconceived or
ill-conceived, both within and outside the Government, by people fear-
ful that it would impinge on executive authority or, conversely, would
impinge on some vague idea about freedom of thought, that we would
be training party-line-type individuals, which is, of course, not the
intent of the act at all.
My only solution to this would be that great care would have to be
exercised "in the establisliment of the Academy and particularly in the
naming of the hierarchy, members of the Commission and the various
Academy officials, because they would be expected to bear the brunt of
1328 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
this attack, and much of their ability would flow from their well-
established reputations and from the fact that their responses would
be couched in reasonable terms, rather than extremistic terms.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Mr. Delaney, in both the bill introduced by our col-
league on the committee, Mr, Ashbrook, and the bill introduced by
Mr. Gubser of California, there is the provision for the establishment
of a Joint Congressional Freedom Committee.
I would like to have your conunents on that proposal and on the
possible role of such a joint committee in helping to establish and
maintain a degree of independence for the Commission.
Mr. Delaney. Frankly, I think that the establishment of a com-
mittee with congressional representation is a terribly important con-
sideration. I also think that such a joint committee, if at all pos-
sible— and I f ranldy don't know whether it would be — should include
representation from the executive branch.
I say that for this reason : The presence of Congressmen on the com-
mittee can go a long way toward maintaining the balance and the
integrity of the institution, from the mere fact that they are Congress-
men of the United States.
The presence of the executive agency officials on such a coromittee or
as advisers to such a committee would go a long way, it seems to me,
to wear off any of the negativism or fears that might emanate from
the executive departments coincidental with the creation of the Acad-
emy, that working and interrelating together, these officials and the
Congressmen might very well, and indeed must, set the tone for the
successful operation of this training establishment. Otherwise, I am
afraid the idea might tend to be extreme.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Well, then, your suggestion would seem to be that
rather than a separate joint congressional committee comprised ex-
clusively of Members of Congress, there should be some type of an
advisory committee to the Commission which would include congres-
sional representation and advisers — in other words, something in the
general pattern of the Hoover Commission type of setup.
Mr. Delaney. Yes, sir ; exactly.
Mr, JoHANSEN, Where the President or the executive designate non-
congressional members, along with those selected by the Vice President
from the Senate and by the Speaker from the House ?
Mr, Delaney, Yes, sir.
Mr, JoHANSEN, Thank you.
Mr. Bruce. Mr, Delaney, may I congratulate you, first of all, upon
the thorougliness of your paper,
Mr. Delaney. Thank you, Mr. Congressman.
Mr. Bruce. May I ask you this question ?
Who sets the State Department policy ? Well, I mean in the final
analysis?
Mr. Delaney, In the final analysis — I will have to give you a two-
part answer.
In the fuial analysis, the President of the United States is respon-
sible. On the working level, policy is made in any number of ways.
Today it might be a desk officer. Tomorrow, it might be a committee.
The next day it might be an Embassy. It depends, really, on the
specific question.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1329
Mr. Bruce. But in the final analysis, as far as the goals and the
objectives, this rests primarily with the President of the United States.
Mr. Delaney. Yes, sir.
Mr. Bruce. Now, how would the Freedom Academy exist if its
analysis and studies led them to the conclusion that there were basic
errors in policy ? ^Vhat would happen ?
Mr. Delaney. Politically speaking, there would probably be one
terrific fight, but from the point of view of how you reconcile this, I
would hope, personally, that we would never reach that impasse where
this sort of a situation arose, which is one reason why I would argue
strongly for a high-level commission being appointed.
But if the situation should ever arise where there would be a con-
flict based, let's say, on the research of the Academy, which I suppose
is theoretically possible, then I believe, strictly speaking, it is not the
function of the Academy publicly to make an issue of this; it is not
within its scope ; it would be ruinous of the Academy and its future,
and that if there are private misgivings, then they should be conveyed
privately.
Mr. Bruce. Well, reading one of the bills, the bill put in by Mr.
Herlong, the Advisory Committee that he recommends would be the
heads of the following agemcies, and from officers and employees there-
of: Department of State; Department of Defense; Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare; CIA; FBI; ICA; and USIA.
Is it conceivable, from your experience as an official of the Federal
Government in some of these areas, that this Advisory Committee
would mider foreseeable circumstances go contrary to the established
policy in their relationship with the Freedom Academy ?
Mr. Delaney. No. Certainly my experience is such that I could say
very simply "No," but I think here we have a question of just how you
define the scope of the Academy.
I think. Congressman, you are perhaps suggesting that the Academy
has a policymaking role, but it doesn't — or it shouldn't.
Mr. Bruce. No; I am not suggesting that. I am suggesting that
when their research reaches conclusions, such as their — that would be
at variance with what appears to be established policy, that under any
form of academic freedom at this point, they would be almost duty-
bound in their instruction, in their training, to teach what they thought
from their research was the correct analysis of the nature of the world
Communist movement.
Now, if this turned out to be at variance with, for instance, State
Department, how would you settle this ? Or would, without some ef-
fective barriers, the executive agencies of Government at this point
squash the independent research and the academic freedom, as it were,
of the Freedom Academy ? How would you solve this ?
Mr. Delaney. I would avoid it, if at all possible, which may not be
a straightforward answer.
Mr. Bruce. Well, realistically
Mr. Delaney. But it seems to me that once you get into this area,
where research in the Academy is pointed at possible criticism of the
Government, the executive branch of Government in the handling of
its foreign affairs, you have overstepped the bounds, that this is ex-
actly the sort of thing that the Academy must stay away from.
Mr. Bruce. Well, now, let me give you a specific example.
1330 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
Suppose a Govemment-financed study came up with a conclusion
such as this, and I quote it : "Whether we admit it to ourselves or not,
we benefit enormously from the ability of the Soviet police system
to keep law and order over the 200-million-odd Eussians and the many
additional millions in the satellite states. The breakup of the Russian
Communist empire today would doubtless be conducive to freedom,
but would be a good deal more catastrophic for world order than was
the breakup of the Austro-Hungarian Empire in 1918."
Now, let's assume that Dr. Possony, or whoever you had on the
faculty and doing research with the Freedom Academy, would come
up with something diametrically opposed to this, or diametrically op-
posed to the five-volmne study known as the Phoenix Papers^ would
there be any liberty to teach within the Freedom Academy contrary to
these things, if, by chance, these happened to be a dominant thought at
State Department level ?
Mr. Delaney. Yes ; I would thinli so. Very definitely, it is within
the context of the purposes of this Academy to expound all reasonable
points of view— reasonable, documented points of view.
Mr. Bruce. Right.
Mr. Delaney. We have that today in our various service schools,
where you will find on one platform someone advocating the recogni-
tion of Red China as an argument, and someone following them deny-
ing the efficacy of this argument. I believe our people must know of
the existence of these two things. One would hope that they have the
good sense to make a reasonable judgment based on knowledgeability,
but, as you have stated this, I see no essential conflict at that stage.
I would suggest that if a man comes up with a well-documented, in-
teresting, provocative argument, it should be very definitely a part of
the instruction.
Mr. Bruce. Well, I don't want to belabor this, but to me it is a very
important point.
How could you conceive that the Freedom Academy would remain
free of coercion, when our Ambassador to Cuba under a previous ad-
ministration was ignored because it Avas contrary to State Department
policy ?
]Mr. Delaney. Congressman, I would hope that you gentlemen in
your foresight and wisdom would write cautions into the legislation.
You, after all, are the individuals concerned with the proper assem-
blage of legislation for the United States ; and if this is a genuine con-
cern— and I think, perhaps, it definitely merits study and attention —
then, after consideration and deliberation, something should be in-
cluded to take care of these cautions, these questions, before any bill
goes before the full House for passage.
Mr. Johansen. Will the gentleman yield at that point ?
Mr. Bruce. Yes.
Mr. Johansen. Doesn't that go to the very point of the oversight
role of a joint committee of Congress, either separately or as part of
an Advisory Committee ?
Mr. Delaney. I would say, sir, that it certainly does, because know-
ing the Congress of the United States, I feel certain that if a gentle-
man feels so inclined to get up and criticize, he will, rightfully so, and
if the situation arises, that perhaps quiet consultation with members
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1331
of the congressional commission to the Freedom Academy might
smooth the way for the existence and success of the work of the school.
Mr. Bruce. Well, I will confess, I have the same concern that
you do, and we have talked before on the necessity or the need for
some type of Freedom Academy, but I have to personally see clearly
that it can't become just another agency, that it can't be controlled
by policymakers who have their own pet theories — devoid of reality —
of the nature of the world Communist movement. If it does this, it
becomes a harmful thing, instead of a good creation, and I have been
pondering this before I even came to the Congress, and frankly haven't
come up with an answer that satisfies me. How can you create this
Freedom Academy dealing with this highly controversial subject, with
the President making the appointment, subject, of course, to confirma-
tion by the Senate — such as we have in the Herlong bill — with the
heads of all the executive branches, practically, on the Advisory Com-
mittee. How this can serve the function that we envisage baffles me,
frankly.
Thank you very much.
Mr. Delaney. Yes, sir.
Mr. ScHADEBERG. Mr. Delaney, would you care to comment on how
the recruiting is done for these schools in Cuba ?
Mr. DeIoAney. It takes many and varied forms, Mr. Congressman.
I have seen several of their approaches. They vary all the way
from sizing up, let's say, within university context, students who
seem to have a potential for leadership or for studies or seem to be
embittered against society for one reason or another.
They are generally identified, fii*st of all; watched by the profes-
sional students or other cadre members; and at some point are ap-
proached, either with a scholarship offer to study in Cuba or Moscow
or Peiping, or perhaps if their assessment of the man's character is
such, they will offer him a subsidy, a dole. They will put him on
the payroll for a w^hile within the university context or the local
context and in this way compromise him, and, at a later date, as he
is drawn slowly into the web, then they might decide this man is
worth developing, this man is worth keeping, and then send him
off.
Then again, they might take someone who is, let's say, socialistically
inclined and hit him cold with an offer to travel.
A third type of possibility would be, within the general labor con-
text, to pick laborers who might one day turn into labor union
leaders and to, by flattery and the offer of travel, by some financial
remuneration, slowly bring them in and then send them off.
Then there is also always the wild-eyed fellow who is against
everything, who would snap up an opportunity like this for op-
portunistic reasons and move off to one of these training camps.
Mr. Schadeberct. Are there any U.S. citizens in these schools?
Mr. Delaney. To my knowledge, no; but it seems highly unlikely
that there aren't Americans.
The Chairman. That there are not ?
Mr. Delaney. There must be Americans. It would stand to reason,
within the context ; but to my knowledge, I am not aware of any.
Mr. Schadeberg. The next question that comes to my mind is: If
that is the way they are trained and recruited, how do they go through
1332 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
the process of the Government, State Department, with respect to
State Department, or whatever it is, the agencies, saying this is for
the purpose of study ?
Mr. Delaney. No ; they evade the controls, by and large.
Mr. ScHADEBERG. Then it is clandestine.
Mr. Delaney. Yes; in 9 cases out of 10, their travel is now
clandestine.
Mr. ScHADEBERG. Directly to the school. Not under the idea that
they are trying to go and study under a uni^^ersity, and then take this
as a side.
Mr. Delaney. By and large, they will utilize both approaches. If
the only way they can get there conveniently is by announcing, let's
say, that they are going to study at the University of Paris, they will
so announce, and when tliey get to Paris or ^hen they get to the Con-
tinent, oti' they go in another direction.
Or, where they are going completely covertly, then there is obvi-
ously no need, because there is no need for documentation.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Mr. Tuck. Mr. Chairman, as I understand the legislation we are
considering, the concept of this legislation is to make studies and to
ascertain the truth, in conformity, and that the Connnission would
have no power to issue any orders or directives or anything else that
would be binding in any way upon any of the agencies of the Govern-
ment. Is that true ?
Mr. Delaney. That is my understanding ; yes, sir.
Mr. Tuck. And do I understand also — and referring particu-
larly to the Herlong bill, in which he provides for certain agencies
to be represented as advisers — that they are purely advisers, or con-
sultants, and that they would have no power under the proposal to
impinge upon the liberties of the Freedom Academ}^ or the Commis-
sion constituting that Academy ? Is that correct ?
Mr. Delaney. Except as so established within the advisory frame-
work. And I might add, Governor, cynically, I would hazard a guess
and suggest that they would serve as buffers.
The Chairman. They would what ?
Mr. Delaney. Serve as buffers between the outside critics and the
integrity of the institution.
Mr. JoHANSEN. I would like to just amend my comments.
When you mentioned the bills that include this joint congressional
committee, that Mr. Schadeberg's also includes that provision.
Mr. Delaney. Yes, sir.
Mr. Bruce. Mr. Chairman, an observation on that.
As I read the Herlong bill, I believe this committee plays a little
more vital role than just that, because they are charged with review
of the plans, programs, and activities, transmitting to the Commission
recommendations, meet with the Commission, to consult, transmit to
the President and to the Congress the report containing — I think their
influence is going to be a little bit more than just sort of an advisory
committee, because they apparently are part of the liaison between
the executive branch and the Congress, as well.
The Chairman. He used the word "buffer."
Mr. Johansen. But am I correct in the understanding that the Ad-
visory Committee proposed in the Herlong bill does not include con-
gressional membership?
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1333
Mr. Delaney. That's right.
The Chairman. That inclusion is contained only in what bills?
A shbrook, Schadeberg, and Gubser.
The advisory concept, I think, is included in all the bills, not only
the Herlong but in the Boggs-Taf t bill.
Mr. Bruce. Yes, sir.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Do you see any reason why there can't be a wedding
of the two ?
Mr. Delaney. No, sir. My personal opinion is that I believe there
should be a wedding of the two.
Mr. IcHORD. May I interrupt at that point ?
And the wedding you contemplate, or you would recommend, is put-
ting Members of Congress on this Advisory Committee?
Mr. Delaney. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Mr. Delaney. Thank you, sir.
(The Soto article submitted by Mr. Delaney follows :)
JPRS: 12398
8 February 1962
REVOLUTIONARY TRAINING SCHOOLS AND THE TRAINING OF CADRES
— Cuba—
By Lionel Soto
Photocopies of this report may be purchased from :
Photoduplication Service
Library of Congress
washington 25, d.c.
U.S. Joint Publications Research Service
1636 Connecticut Avenue, NW.
Washington 25, D.C.
Foreword
This publication was prepared under contract by the UNITED STATES JOINT
PUBLICATIONS RESEARCH SERVICE, a federal government organization
established to service the translation and research needs of the various govern-
ment departments.
JPRS : 12398
CSO : 6511-D
Revolutionaky Training Schools and the Training of Cadres
— Cuba—
[Following is the translation of an article by Lionel Soto in the
Spanish-language periodical Cuba Socialista (Socialist Cuba), Vol. I,
No. 3, Havana, November 1961, pages 28-41.]
One of the general diflSculties of the Revolution is the shortage of cadres in
all areas of revolutionary endeavor.
First of all, we need political cadres everywhere.
In the economy, for instance, there is a major shortage of technical cadres.
This is the legacy of our semicolonial backwardness; and this legacy is ag-
gravated by the treason of groups of engineers, architects, and others who, be-
cause of class origin or corruption and lack of conscience, preferred the "boister-
ous and brutal North," as Jose Marti put it ; they preferred emigration /to the
U.S./ to staying in our beautiful and liberated homeland.
30-471— 64— ,pt. 2—7
1334 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
The selection of cadres and their theoretical training is however of truly deci-
sive importance to the Revolution.
Our tasks here are vast :
We must train an integrated corps of revolutionary cadres, both old and
young.
We must train technical and cultural cadres vi'ho will be with the Revolution
and for the Revolution, all the way.
We must educate, reeducate, and win over the old intellectuals, the technical
men of yesterday, the professors and teachers who do not yet understand what
this is all about.
Finally, we must step up and develop revolutionary education.
Lenin taught that it is men, cadres, who decide everything, who are the
pillars of the Marxist Party.
The breakup of the machinery of the bourgeois-landowner government con-
fronts us with the necessity of filling vacant slots with tens of thousands of
revolutionary men and women who are not familiar with their new functions.
Today, we have hundreds of thousands of revolutionaries, but there are far
less revolutionaries who have the necessary theoretical or political training.
Revolutionaries without political and theoretical training and without techni-
cal knowledge will have to learn as they go along and they will have to learn in
the schools of the Revolution.
Experience has shown that missions can be accomplished where capable and
conscientious cadres are assigned.
On 2 September 1960, the people of Cuba approved the "Havana Declaration"
in its National General Assembly ; this is a program for national liberation and
Socialism.
Following the nationalization of foreign companies, the laws on the nationaliza-
tion of large domestic companies were decreed on 13 October 1960; thus our
Revolution definitely entered its Socialist phase.
This created new problems for us.
One of these concerns the creation of a Socialist consciousness, without which
we cannot build Socialism.
To meet this need, we have our Schools of Revolutionary Education.
Earlier Cadre Schools
Schools of this kind have glorious antecedents in Cuba. Under various forms,
they have been operating since the establishment of the first Marxist-Leninist
party of Cuba, the Communist Party, in 1925.
The form of these schools varied with the times, of course. Sometimes, they
were located in the home of a militant ; others were located in a specially selected
building ; at times, even prison cells served as class rooms.
The conscientious revolutionaries always paid careful attention to questions
of theory, to the formation of a Socialist awareness, as a means to strengthen
revolutionary action and steer it in the right direction.
In view of semicolonial, imperialist rule, the Marxist-Leninist education
effort was a hard task.
Only a very small group of men and women could go through these schools.
Persecutions, financial difficulties, and the environment in general constituted
serious obstacles here.
During the last 5 years of tyranny,^ for example, we operated the small, though
highly important National Cadre School of the Popular Socialist Party; we
were completely outlawed at the time, but for 3^ months this school trained
groups [of] 15-20 selected cadres in the fundamentals of Marxism-Leninism. The
school was a boarding school which lasted for a 3^-month cycle ; no one left
the premises until the end of the course. In the specially equipped premises,
students lived in cramped quarters ; this required strict discipline ; everyone
had to talk softly and had to keep away from windows.
Despite these enormous difficulties, the school continued operating in the same
locale for more than 4 years ; more than 200 cadres graduated from it and its
existence was never revealed ; there was not the slightest carelessness or indis-
cretion.
We must also mention the Tumbasiete School which operated near Mayari,
the center of the 2d Eastern Front "Frank Pais," founded by Major Raul Castro
during the national liberation war. The Tumbasiete School was the forerunner
iThis was during the years 1954-1959 [committee footnote].
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1335
of the ideological training effort in the schools for the comrades who were
fighting in the mountains.
Long before the armed struggle against Batista was started, Fidel and Raul
and their comrades, jailed for the Moncada incident, were studying the history
of Cuba and the classical books of Marxism which were smuggled into the prison
on Isla de Pinos [Island].
We also had various kinds of provincial schools. Also, many study circles
were organized, including circles for supervised individual study.
Origin of Schools of Revolutionary Education
The system of Schools of Revolutionary Education was launched on 2 Decem-
ber 1960 at the meeting of the directors and assistant directors, who had been
appointed for the first 12 provincial schools and the National Schools, as well
as leaders of the 26 July Movement and of the Popular Socialist Party; this
meeting was chaired by Fidel Castro.
The schools received instant and warm welcomes from the revolutionary
administrations. However, their adequate implementation i-an into two major
obstacles :
the shortage of cadres with sufficient Marxist-Leninist theoretical training,
for assignment as teachers ;
the vice of practicism, that is, the tendency toward exclusively practical
work, relegating study and theory to a secondary position.
These are the obstacles the schools faced in their activities.
The schools did well in this effort and we can say that we have made great
strides here.
We improved the theoretical training of thousands of cadres and activists and
we now have outstanding cadres as teachers.
We have made our modest contribution to the creation of a study-fever, the
fever to study the science of Marxism-Leninism, which today fires the spirit of
the cadres and activists of the Integrated Revolutionary Organizations — and the
heat from that fire is now reaching the working people.
Of course, when the EIR ( Escuelas de Instruccion Revolutionaria— Schools of
Revolutionary Education) were set up, the ORI (Organizaciones Revolucionarias
Integradas — ^Integrated Revolutionary Organizations) did not exist as yet. This
created additional obstacles in the effort of making an adequate student selection.
Besides, the system of the EIR had to concern itself with the changes re-
quired in view of the direct threats of invasion from the US in December 1960
and January 1961 ; the EIR had to mobilize in order to crush the counterrevolu-
tionaries in the Escambray Mountains in February and March 1961 ; they had
to beat back the invasion of imperialist mercenaries via Zapata Swamp on 17
April 1961 ; in a word, the EIR system had to help meet all the urgent needs of
the Revolution.
Following a firm policy, our National Directoi-ate successfully defended its
viewi)oint that classes should not be suspended on account of all this.
The official proclamation of the Socialist character of the Revolution on 16
April, on the eve of the Zapata Swamp invasion, prepared the way for the
interpretation of the Revolution and for the outlining of its prospects ; this is
a problem of prime importance to the teaching effort in our schools.
The subsequent integration of the revolutionary movement into the Integrated
Revolutionary Organizations and their affirmation that Marxism-Leninism is the
ideology of the Revolution served to eliminate difficulties that had existed at the
outset.
The EIR were the first officially integrated organizations of the Revolution
and played an equal role in the subsequent integration.
What Is the System of Schools of Revolutionary Education?
The national system of Schools of Revolutionary Education is a school system
that is relatively uniform at its various levels and that is under a National
Directorate, called the National Directorate of the ORI.
In its work, the National Directorate of EIR works in close cooperation with
the ORI in the provinces, on whose education and propaganda commissions it
rests. The provincial officials of the EIR are the provincial leaders of the ORI.
The schools in the provinces function as study centers for the ORI.
However, overall school policy and internal regulations as well as the budget
are handled by the National Directorate which works on the basis of opera-
tional experience gathered throughout the country.
1336 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
The fiscal autonomy of the National Directorate enables the latter to operate
with a great degree of flexibility. In addition, it can pay our all expenses for
directors, teachers, officials, subordinate personnel, equipment, transportation,
books, etc. ; through the EIR it can also handle directly the payment of wages
and salaries to students during the time they spend away from their places of
work in order to attend parttime or fuUtime classes.
The fulltime students can devote their time to their studies without any other
preoccupation or distraction and they may continue in school only so long as
they make progress in their studies.
The "Nico Lopez" National School and other national schools are directly
under the National Directorate of EIR.
The EIR instruct tbe cadres and activists which perform their functions both
in the ORI proper and in the social or mass organizations or in the government
agencies.
The Teaching of Marxism-Leninism
As of now, these schools are the principal and most effective means the Rev-
olution has for the study of Marxism-Leninism.
The fundamentals of dialectical and historical materialism and of Marxist
economic theory are being studied there at various levels.
We said 'fundamentals' because Cuba has not yet arrived at a stage where it
could make a scholarly, profound, and extended study of the complex science of
Marxism-Leninism ; this is a phase which we have set as our goal, beginning
within a period of 2-3 years, with the help of the establishment of a Higher
Institute of Marxism-Leninism.
For the moment, we are counting on the fraternal help of the other Socialist
countries in training our higher-level cadres, our scholars of theory, who will
train the instructional and research cadres at this institute and its various
branches.
The schools must offer theoretical instruction, though the latter must be in-
timately linked with events in Cuba and the world ; they must at the same time
ofl^er instruction in methods of practical leadership.
The schools must constantly incorporate the live materials and documents
that reflect our development in their curricula.
For example, the draft of the CFSU program was included in the lesson plan
as discussion material. The following items were similarly included : the speech
of Fidel Castro on 26 July ; the articles by Raul Castro on the subject of 26 July
1953 and by Bias Roca on the new ethics of the working class and the aid this
class is giving to the Revolution ; the documents on the progress of the economy,
etc. The students also discuss the daily press in class. The magazines Cuba
Socialista and La Revista Internacional (International Magazine) are highly
valuable aids in this respect.
Admission to these schools is not subject to passing an entrance examination.
The instructors are not the old type of professors, but revolutionary cadres.
And nobody but Marxists are graduated.
The schools make men and women more aware that it is their struggle, their
daily activities and practices that make them stand out, more than anything
else. They do not give the students any pat formulas ; they offer them guidance
and open new vistas to their graduates.
Though group study in these schools is very Important, we think that it cannot
replace individual study, which is the most important method of learning what
theory is all about.
The revolutionary must become accustomed to studying Marxism-Leninism
ceaselessly ; the classics of Marxism-Leninism, the books and pamphlets, the
articles and theses — these are his study materials.
We salute all those who are making a determined effort to study individually.
The PRI must organize assistance for those comrades.
National Schools
The "Nico Lopez" EIR has 60 students and is currently the national cadre
school. It is the highest rung on the ladder of our system.
Students attend classes on a boarding-school basis for 6 months and may leave
the premises once a week.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1337
The program includes the complete study of the Manual de Economia PoUtica
(Political Economy Manual) put out by the Academy of Sciences USSR; this is
supplemented by references to Capital by Marx, and Imperialism — Capitalism.' s
Highest and Last Phase by Lenin, as well as other Marxist classics and modern
works.
The students also take up the essential elements of Fundamentos de la Filoso-
fia Marxista (Foundations of Marxist Philosophy) published by the Academy of
Sciences USSR, along with references to other classical works, especially
Materialism and Empirioeriticism by Lenin, On Contradiction and About Prac-
tice by Mao Tse-tung, as well as the Manual of Marxism-Leninism by O.
Kuusinen, and others.
The students furthermore study the Cuban Revolution; revolutionary organ-
izations ; the international situation ; interpretation of Cuban history ; the ex-
periences of the Russian Revolution and of the Chinese Revolution, etc.
The study of economics is closely tied in with the economic history of Cuba
and the economic means for the transition to Socialism.
We also set up a National Teachers School (3-month course) and we are in
the process of organizing a National Labor Union School (4-month course), a
National Fisheries School (60 students), and a National People's Farmer School
(600 students every 3 months) ; all of these schools will have or now do have
different levels of instruction.
The Labor Union School, for example, will operate on a provincial level and
the fisheries and farmer schools will operate on the base level.
Provincial Schools and Base Schools
The provincial EIR are conceived as boarding schools for provincial, munici-
pal, and regional cadres.
For the moment, they are teaching accelerated 3-month courses offering in-
struction in program that is generally the same as that of the national school,
though less intensive.
As in the national schools, the nerve center of education is political economy
here.
This is rooted in an undeniable fact : we are in charge of the country's economy
and we are building Socialism. Economic buildup is the decisive factor in the
triumph of the new social system.
On the other hand, Marxist philosophy offers general principles of life and
struggle ; in particular, it offers the concept of the movment, of eternal renewal,
and of contradiction as the motive forces for vital processes.
Without a knowledge of the fundamentals of Marxist philosophy, one can-
not gain a deep understanding of revolutionary changes.
The history of Cuba reveals the historical roots of our economy and the form-
ative elements of our nationality, as well as the vast struggles of the Cuban
people for its liberty.
Right now, the provincial EIR constitute a consolidated system of 16 schools ;
starting with the third cycle, on 1 September, they will have more than 1,028
students.
The Base Schools of Revolutionary Education are centers intended for the
training of the revolutionary cadres at the base.
The EBIR (Escuelas Basicas de Instruccion revolucinonaria — Base Schools
of Revolutionary Education) are either fulltime (45-day) schools or parttime
schools ; in the latter case, the students work on their jobs for 4 hours a day
and then attended school for 8 hours for a period of 60 days.
The EBIR are set up in big factories, sugar plantations, various industrial
centers, people's farms, cooperatives, or in cities and regions. There are worker
school, farmer schools, or mixed schools.
The basic program of these schools is constituted by La historia me aisolvera
(History Will Vindicate Me) by Fidel Castro and Los Fundamentos del Sociah
ismo en Cuba (The Foundations of Socialism in Cuba) by Bias Roca. The
curriculum also includes works on the labor movement, the agrarian revolution,
and elements of political economy, as well as political materials from current
national and international publications and sources.
The EBIR developed as the result of initiative from the ranks. The workers
at the La Rayonera textile factory in Matanzas, in cooperation with the pro-
vincial EIR, devised this basic type. At the 3d National Conference of EIR on
1338 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
26 April, this project was launched and the program for it was worked out.
The first schools opened in Havana and Oriente on 15 May. At the 4th National
Conference of EIR from 21-22 July, there were 169 of these basic schools
throughout the country.
This shows that this initiative was correct.
Here is the current status of the EBIR system.
No. of Base
Schools
No. of
Students
Oriente . _ _ _ _ _
100
9
74
7
63
10
2, 976
Caniaguey _ _
540
Las Villas - _____-_-_ __ ___
2, 516
Matanzas _ _ _ ._ _
201
Havana _. _ _ _ . _ _
2, 835
P. del Rio
387
263
9,455
The EBIR are in the process of consolidation ; until December 1961, they will
be in the phase of planned expansion. The National Directorate of EIR is
making a careful study of this new activity.
The situation will look as follows in December, on the basis of plans and
budget grants.
No. of Base
Schools
No. of
Students
Oriente (see Note) _
84
10
no
15
90
21
3,500
Camaguev _ _ _
600
Las Villas.- ._ _
3, 500
Matanzas
600
Havana __
3,500
P. del Rio. _____ _ _
900
330
12,600
(Note. In Oriente Province, the current 100 base schools will be combined
into 84 schools with greater capacity and better quality ; these consolidated
schools will be located in the key centers of the province.)
We want to emphasize that we have important EIR which are not directly
involved in the activities of the National Directorate, though they are tied in
with the latter and are under the political direction of the ORI.
The "Osvaldo Sanchez" EIR of the armed forces has just graduated 750 in-
structors for battalions and companies in its first training cycle.
The schools of the Association of Young Rebels teach youth cadres.
The Federation of Cuban Women is in the process of creating its own national
school for women's leaders.
Similarly, we have economic cadre schools (such as the school for industrial
managers) and others of various types which offer instruction on the basis of the
same principles as the EIR, in conjunction with their own specialized subject
matter.
Academic and Discipline Aspects of the Schools
Our program and our available resources are not enough to implement this
objective. We must also take up the subject of the internal disciplinary manage-
ment of the schools and their activities.
Discipline is a factor that is highly important in political success.
The external forms of discipline — e.g., military training — supplement the
cadres' and militants' attitudes which are rooted in political awareness.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1339
For the students, the decisions of the director or the executive board con-
stitute orders to be obeyed. This does not imply a lack of democracy, since it
is the students who elect their own student representatives who, in cooperation
with the director and the assistant director, make up the executive board.
Class schedules and lesson plans play a major role in these schools ; these
schedules and plans must be followed without change once they have been
approved.
The school must endeavor to stimulate Socialist conduct. It must inculcate in
the student a spirit of responsibility for the collective, a spirit of concern for his
comrades, a spirit of help for his slow comrades, etc.
In this respect (in addition to serious pedagogical reasons), we have a combi-
nation of formal individual study, which is the principal method, plus group
study, which is handled in groups of 8-12 students in a i-ational and well pro-
grammed manner.
Group study serves to help the slow students and makes for group spirit.
In some schools, we have to fight hard against the lack of understanding on
the part of some directors who fail to see the pedagogical advantages and moral
aspects of group study.
General meetings and assemblies are called periodically or whenever a problem
arises ; this is a means for developing criticism and self-criticism and this in
turn makes out of each school a living cell of the Revolution. Quite a few peo-
ple learn in this manner the meaning of these principles of revival in Socialist
thought and action.
Volunteer work inside and outside the school (on days of rest) tests the real
qualities of the student. AVith the help of the students, schools tackle repair
jobs, plant crops, take care of children in nurseries, and build. Some students
fan out to the factories, people's farms, and cooperatives to volunteer theijr
manual labor for Socialism.
Much attention is being devoted to Socialist emulation in each school and to
competition between schools. In this competition, schools are graded on such
points as academic class levels, qualifications, educational and practical activi-
ties, savings, cleanliness, number of graduates, fulfillment of class schedules,
etc.
We must emphasize once again that the students must realize what a tremen-
dous effort the Revolution is making in keeping so many thousands of cadres
and militants out of the production process and assigning more than 500 valu-
able cadres to revolutionary instruction.
This effort must be repaid through the powerful and effective work of com-
rades who are graduated from these schools and take their place in the produc-
tion effort and in political action.
Selection of Students
This is a problem of major importance.
We said often that the students must be selected from among revolutionary
cadres and activists, i.e., from among those who distinguished themselves in
the struggle. Of those, we now have tens of thousands and we are getting more
every day.
This applies of course to selection for all types of schools we mentioned.
It is a sad error to think that a school of theory is going to "hatch" activists
and cadres. This may happen in isolated cases, but it is not the rule.
We must say that, during the first cycle, a considerable proportion of students
should not have been picked in the first place ; but we are correcting this mistake.
Sometimes, we were able to observe that some regions and provinces did not
send the best cadres with the most experience to these schools. There are two
general reasons for this :
the particular cadres "cannot" be spared from their duties ;
fear that the National Directorate might pick these men after graduation for
assignment to different duties, thus preventing them from returning to their
original duties.
This reasoning is false. The more responsibility the cadres have, the more
they need to go to school. As for the transfer of cadres from one duty to
another, from provincial to national duty slots, that is something that may hap-
pen in view of the great nationwide needs of the ORI and of the government
for trained cadres. But to oppose this, to look out only for one's own bailiwick
indicates rigidity and reveals a localist spirit among certain comrades. Every-
body must understand that the Revolution is a compact whole ; there is no such
thing as a series of "local revolutions."
1340 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
The selection process itself is a yardstick for the school and for the selection
officials.
Sometimes, women are automatically barred from consideration. This hap-
pened, for instance, during the first provincial courses in the Province of Las
Villas and during the second provincial course in Matanzas.
This constitutes a concession to old prejudices and, though this is not a gen-
eral phenomenon, it does crop up in other places.
The failure to select women as students is an injustice and a bad mistake.
The women are fighting on all fronts of the Revolution, including that front
which is the toughest for them : /national/ defense, Why, then, this concession
to prejudice?
The Prohlem of the Faculty and the Directors
The creation of a teaching body and of directors and assistant directors has
been and is one of the most complicated problems we are facing in these schools.
To run classes in theory in a political cadre school, we must have teachers who
not only know their textbooks but who have also been or are revolutionary cadres.
This is the key point here
In the first school cycle, the schools were run with the help of teachers drawn
from the revolutionary organizations which, without cutting back on their daily
work, made tremendous efforts to teach in these schools for a certain period
of time each day or for a certain continued period of instruction.
The increase in the complex and urgent tasks of the Revolution as well as
the rapid growth in the revolutionary schools themselves confronted us with
the need for pulling out dedicated cadres and assigning them exclusively to teach-
ing duties.
It is interesting to note that some good cadres with practical revolutionary
experience but little or no prior education, were able to assimilate their Marxist
texts so rapidly that they could be assigned as directors and assistant directors
of provincial schools and as directors and teachers of Base Schools.
Many people are surprised that the majority of the directors and assistant
directors of these schools are so young in years and that their experience in Marx-
ist militancy is of such recent origin. We know that it takes years to master
Marxist theory adequately. However, the extremely rapid advance of the Revo-
lution and the need for cadres who are dedicated to the effort of teaching do not
allow us to make any compromises here ; this is indeed the only solution to our
great cadre problem.
We believe that these young cadres are doing their duty with dignity and skill
and that, as time goes on, they will improve their knowledge more and more.
These cadres have everything it takes to advance: intelligence, willpower,
the necessary books, adequate subsistence, the vigor and courage of the Socialist
Revolution and, above all, a nucleus of Marxist-Leninist revolutionaries who
guide and aid them.
Practical experience teaches us that this bold method of promoting cadres is
correct.
We are making a major effort to group teachers, directors, and assistant di-
rectors in study circles where they can round out their knowledge.
As far as the directors and asistant directors are concerned, we have learned
some interesting lessons. The director — and, in his absence, the assistant di-
rector— is the top-ranking officer of the school.
This is why we must select our directors very carefully.
Experience has shown that the director must meet the following essential
requirements :
capacity for leadership, flexibility, and pleasant disposition ;
knowledge of all subjects taught at the school and inclination toward study.
The director's qualities are directly reflected in the school as a whole ; we must
not forget that he lives together with the 60 students of his school.
The daily life of the school at times reveals difficulties arising out of subjective
or objective factors.
A situation in which 60 students with differing personalities, though united
by a common ideal, live closely together, is almost bound to produce occasional
friction and misunderstandings. But this is no cause for despair. These inci-
dents are opportunities for Socialist education through the exercise of criticism
and self-criticism.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1341
Directors who do not underestimate the "details" of education and daily life —
such as the quality of the menu, hygiene, comportment, care of the library and
of books ; strict compliance with schedules, beautiflcation and care of premises,
etc. — contribute not only to the maintenance of order in the school but also
contribute to the education of the comrades.
The ORI and Their Relations to the Schools
Until now, some organizations of the ORI have failed to give due consideration
and attention to the provincial schools. The ORI have fallen down chiefly in
the respective education and propaganda commissions.
This lack of attention is negative. We do not mean to say that the leaders
of the ORI are permanent teachers, but we do believe that they should at least
help present the summaries at the end of each of the most important class cycles
and direct conferences and maintain lively exchange of ideas with the students
at the cadre schools.
If we assume that the ORI should merely select graduates for placement in
specific job slots, how could they accomplish this without close liaison with the
school, without knowing all about the cadres?
Conclusions
The EIR are in full development. Some things remain to be corrected, modi-
fied, and improved within the EIR.
From the 1st National Conference, held in December 1960, to the 4th, on
21-22 July 1961, a period of about 8 months, we can register a tremendous ad-
vance in the creation of schools and in the expansion of theoretical studies.
Some 1,175 students have taken courses in the provincial schools and more
than 4,000 attended the Base Schools.
The practical effect from the assignment of graduates of these schools have
already made themselves felt in the work of the ORI. The results are encourag-
ing. According to the opinions of the provincial ORI and the organization where
these graduates were placed, we can say that elementary, intermediate, and
higher theoretical studies have been converted into material strength.
The revolutionary enthusiasm of the students is indescribable. Each theo-
retical lesson acts as stimulus for their behavior and conduct. We can now
see graduates of these students in many positions of responsibility. We find them
in the leadership organs of the ORI, in factory managements, in farm and
cooperative managements. One hundred of them are now active in the field
of education and we have 100 additional directors of schools who emerged from
the EIR. We also meet them in the government agencies, in the militia, and
in the Rebel Army.
We can find graduates of these schools holding down responsible key jobs al-
most anywhere. Our front of Socialist revolutionary instruction penetrates
everywhere ; in production, in defense, in culture.
We have placed major emphasis on these schools. However, we are also
involved in other academic initiatives.
In Havana, for instance, we now have a wide network of elementary evening
schools, with 2 hours of study per day ; here we have more than 7,000 students
in 200 schools.
In Havana and Oriente, we have practical schools (2 or 3 weeks), run by
ORI, where young cadres learn the functioning of the different sectors of labor.
And thousands of graduates are being assigned to leadership of study circles
at various levels.
We cannot even begin to count all the discussion groups. The number of
discussion group members has increased by thousands.
The effort of political education is very important. The Revolution requires
that this effort be intensified and improved constantly.
The^ Chairman, The next witness is Mr. Stuart Morrison of the
Miami Herald.
Mr. Morrison, we are delighted to have you. We know of your
work but, for the record — this record will be printed — and would
you please give us your background ?
Mr. Morrison. My personal background, sir?
The Chairman. Yes, sir.
1342 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
STATEMENT OF H. STUART MORRISON
Mr. Morrison. Yes, sir, I have no prepared statement; I will speak
for the record, but off the cuff.
Personal backo^round is as follows: I am 38 years old, have been
employed by the Miami Herald for the past IT years. Initially I was
a printer in the composing room and during the next 10 years of my
employment worked in all phases of the mechanical and production
areas of the newspaper. Since that time I have been exposed to all
other areas of production and management.
I was appomted director of the Operation Amigo program in 1961
at the time of its birth.
I have four children, served in the United State Navy during World
War II, attended the University of Miami at night.
Present position would be national director for Operation Amigo
for the Knight, Copley, and Scripps-Howard newspapers.
Operation Ajnigo is a nonprofit organization established mider the
proper Florida statutes.
I would like to make it clear that I don't pretend to be an expert
in anything other than the director of Operation Amigo.
The first time that I set foot in Latiri America was approximately
?> years ago. I know how the people feel and react. I think I know
their individual desires and understand what the public can do, both
in the United States and in Latin America, if given the opportunity
to expand their vision.
I am here to testify for the Freedom Academy bills, because in
concept, as I understand it, they go into the area of research and
development, of the private sector, as opposed to strictly a branch
of the Government.
I think, first, we will start with Operation Amigo, and it would
fall into three categories — the how, the why, and the results of it.
The previous witness testified to the actions that the Communist
bloc nations are exerting in Central and South America. Amigo
relates only to Central and South America. For years, especially
since the war, the Communists in Latin America have had an ac-
celerated program of indoctrination, chiefly at the youth in this
hemisphere ; and it was the editors of the Miativi Herald who thought
that we have not set up a defense against this, nor launched an ef-
fective counterattack against this movement.
If we in the United States believe in our way of life, then why
shouldn't someone get up and fight for it ?
The Communist bloc nations spend millions of dollars in Central
and South America, sending propaganda to the high schools and
the universities, paying professional scholars at the university level,
professional students, just waiting to prey on the young students
coming up from the high school level.
They are transporting, as the other witness said, students to Com-
munist bloc nations and sending them back into Central and South
America as fully fledged diplomats.
We in America, or the United States, have left the difficult art of
diplomacy solely to the Government. It is a very difficult task, and
we as individuals in the United States have failed in promoting
ourselves as the individual diplomat.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1343
The Communist countries have, under the significance of political
warfare as opposed to hot warfare, some 40 years ago; and they are
beating us, and they are beating us badly. They are unorthodox;
they are effective. They are in the unions ; they are in the schools ; they
are in the professional staffs of the universities; they are eveiywhere
that you can conceivably think they would be.
Operation Amigo is completely subsidized through private enter-
prise. We thought that if we brought some of these future leaders of
the Latin American countries to the United States to give them a
firsthand look at the way we operate, at what makes our system tick,
at our tax structure, without any whitewash at all — we attempt to show
them the good and the bad — then these future leaders could go back
to their local high schools and communities and tell them the truth.
Jose Gonzales, who has been selected to come to the States, has seen for
himself; they are going to believe Jose Gonzales and not Communist
propaganda.
Operation Amigo was initiated by the Miami Herald 21/^ years ago,
and we now have the support of the Copley newspapers and the
Scripps-Howard newspapers.
Operation Amigo was a giant at its start, actually. We intended
to bring 40 students up in the first group, let them live with our own
high school students, and send them back. In the first 3 months,
we brought some eight groups up, about 300 students.
Then we said, "Well, if it works in Miami, why can't it work upstate,
somewhere around Cocoa, Cape Canaveral area ?"
And we sent the first group of students up to Cocoa High School —
that was completely out of our jurisdiction — to see if it would work ;
and it did.
The Chairman. You mean students from
Mr. Morrison. From one of the countries in Central and South
America. One of these groups of students ; yes, sir.
The next year, Mr. Knight offered it to other jurisdictions, and
we now find that we have sent students to Fort Worth ; Houston ; to
Denver; to San Diego, to Santa Rosa, California; Charlotte, North
Carolina; Flint, Michigan; Louisville, Kentucky; Akron, Ohio —
18 States.
It has a twofold purpose.
Mr. Pool. Let me interrupt right there, please, sir.
Mr. Morrison. Yes, sir.
Mr. Pool. You mentioned before Houston. They are in my district.
Mr. Morrison. Sir, these boots I'm wearing are from Fort Worth,
by the way.
Mr. Pool. "Where did you send them in Texas ?
Mr. Morrison. The Fort Worth Press^ a Scripps-Howard news-
paper, with Delbert Willis, took them at the Fort Worth High School,
and I frankly don't know the name of the high school ; and in Houston,
Texas, they went to Bel Air High School, and I believe the other
high school was Lamar. What is it? Lamar? I may or may not
be correct there.
]Vf r. Pool. Do you know how many went there ?
Mr. Morrison. Yes, sir; approximately 120 students have gone to
the State of Texas already.
Mr. Pool. Thank you.
1344 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
Mr. Morrison. Yes, sir.
I will show you the clippings from the newspapers.
It has a twofold purpose. We tell our students, "Wliy can't you
get out and do something for your country ? " Well, what can they do ?
They can buy war bonds ; they can join the Navy, as I so foolishly did
20 years ago. But, that's not the extent of it, but the Amigo program
gives each and every student in the United States who participates an
opportunity to appoint himself as an individual diplomat.
Now, the exposure of this doesn't only deal with the student who
is involved in taking a Latin American into his home. It involves the
entire school, entire school jurisdictions. It involves an entire city
and entire States.
The student that is selected from Latin America is selected in this
fashion, much like the Communists select their students. We go to a
Latin American city and we explain the program to the principals of
all the public high schools. This is where the core of the cancer lies, in
the public schools, the lower income family groups. And we ask them
to submit, based upon proven academic ability, those students who have
excelled themselves with a fine scholastic record over the last 2 or 3
years.
We then set up a committee for the selection of the students. This
committee would consist of one or two newspaper people, Eotarians,
civic leaders, and an educational man, and then these students would
come before this committee — and possibly at times we have had as
many as 700 students apply for 30 scholarships — and, based upon
questions that we ask these students, they are selected to come to the
United States.
The Chairman. At this point, may I ask you to clarify something
for me ?
Mr. Morrison. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. This screening process you explained— where may-
be you have 700 applicants, from which you would choose 30 — is it done
in Central America ?
Mr. Morrison. Oh, yes, sir ; in the city.
The Chairman. These leaders you are talking about are leaders
there?
Mr. Morrison. Correct ; they are nationals. Correct.
The Chairman. And the newspaper ?
Mr. Morrison. They are national newspaper people ; correct.
Mr. Ichord. Are you confining it to students coming from lower
economic levels?
Mr. Morrison. We bring 85 percent from the public schools, 15
percent from the private schools.
Mr. Ichord. Are you looking into their social and economic back-
ground, though, before you accept them in the program ?
Mr. Morrison. Yes, sir. In each and every group, we get four or
five students whom you could not call Communists, but I could say
that they have a tendency to lean that way. These are the students
who would be most acceptable to the offers made by the university-
level professional students.
They come to the United States, and we put them in school for a
period of only 2 weeks. They attend classes with the local high school
students, and on 4 of the 10 days, we take them out on tours to our
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1345
governmental establishments, to our Federal Housing developments,
slum areas, city commission meetings, in an attempt to answer any
questions that they might have had in their mind — or that they might
have had put there — honestly and frankly and justly.
We send them back to the Latin American city, and this is a story
again in itself that I will tell you a little later.
There is a tremendous amount of cost involved in this program,
and not 1 cent has come from the Federal Government, and 50 per-
cent of the funds that go into this program come from Latin nations.
This was not true the first year, but we made them believe that we
are trying to help them in their own fight against communism.
The Operation Amigo program does not stop once they go back
to their own country. This is not a 2-week vacation, and what I
am about to tell you is not very well known here, but I can tell you
this: that the Operation Amigo program in many areas of South
America has more impact than Alianza Para Progreso ^ or the Peace
Corps combined. I am not attacking either one of those areas. The
Peace Corps is fine. The Peace Corps has one fallacy that I know of.
The hot political areas of the universities and the unions are not, to
my knowledge, infiltrated by Peace Corps members. This is where
your trouble is. But you take a Latin American student who has been
trained in the United States, and you send him back into this area,
and you have got an effective worker for our side.
Let's speak about the Operation Amigo clubs. When the students
return to their own country, we don't let them sit idle. We have
established Operation Amigo clubs in 14 countries. We have approxi-
mately 4,000 students. These are Latin students in Operation Amigo
clubs in Central and South America.
This magazine is published in Call, Colombia, published by Latin
students, not gringos going down there showing them how to do it.
Supported by private industry. This explains the program of
Alianza Para Progreso.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Private industry in the Latin American country or
in the United States?
Mr. Morrison. Private industry in Latin Amercia.
Now, let me clarify that just a minute. We have Goodyear down
there and we have IBM and we have Goodrich. We don't believe
that the funds for this program should come from Goodyear, U.S.,
and their Goodyear branch in Venezuela, for instance. The funds for
the program come from Latin American industry in Central and
South America.
We have 4,000 students in the clubs, in 14 to 16 countries. Now
these are — in Peru alone we have 600 students, in eight of the major
cities. These students hold meetings regularly; they have typing
classes, political science classes; they work in the slums. The first
time in the histoi-y of P(iru where you get Peruvians working for
Peru in the slums, not gringos going down there with dollars.
They have their own clubhouse. In many areas, we do not work
with U.S. Cultural Affairs Officers in Central and South America,
but with — for example — the Colombo-American school. It is di-
vorced from the U.S. State Department. In Peru, we continued with
^ Alliance for Progress.
1346 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
our operation although at that time the United States had broken
relations with Peru. We took students out of Guatemala when our
own State Department told me to get out, don't take students, it would
be sure death for me.
There is a tremendous potential for the training of the private indi-
viduals, lawyers, doctors, cabinetmakers, newspaper people. Inci-
dentally, we started to bring up only school teachers as chaperones,
but now we have made it a policy to bring up newspaper reporters,
who maybe before were not too "friendly toward the United States.
I want to show you, very briefly — and I certainly don't want to take
up any more of your time — the complete acceptability of this pro-
gram in Latin America, because it is aside from the U.S. Government
[flipping pages of large scrapbook containing newspaper and other
items]. "Front page, Novedades; front page, Lima newspaper; front
page, Tegucigalpa newspaper.
An interestnig letter from Tom Mann. This is a little city outside of
Bogota, called Niacombi, where about 5,000 students paraded by that
day, just to be selected.
This is interesting. This is an impact to — it is an editorial written
in the LaPrensa Grafica^ and it says :
Operation Amigo is now coming to Salvador as the rest of Latin America, and
from this newspaper's viewpoint, there will be more fruits and benefits derived
from Operation Amigo than the now famous and already started Alianza Para
Progreso.
I have this editorial translated in English. I would like to submit
it as a document.
The Chairman. You want to insert that at this point ?
Mr. MoRRisoisr. Sir?
The Chairman. Do you want it inserted ?
Mr. Morrison. No, sir. These are some of the first Operation
Amigo letterheads that were printed by the students in some of the
countries. Nicaragua, Peru, Colombia.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Let me interrupt you at tliis point. As I understand
it, it is a 2-week period that these students are in the United States.
Mr. Morrison. Two to three weeks ; yes, sir.
Mr. JoHANSEN, How do you overcome the language barrier prob-
lem ?
Mr. Morrison. I don't think there is much of a language barrier,
sir. There is a people barrier.
I don't mean to evade the question. We find that approximately 40
percent of all Latin American students will be able to speak some Eng-
lish. Approximately 80 percent will be able to understand it. We do
have Spanish-English dictionaries, simple phrases, that we issue to
each student. Usually, you will have one or two students in the group
that can act as translators.
tit^aV^^^*^^* ^^' Chairman, at this point, may I make a request that
Mr. Morrison be permitted to submit to the committee, subject to the
review of the committee, whatever documents he desires in support of
this presentation.
The Chairman. Yes, sir, following his statement.
Mr. Morrison. Mr. Pool, are you from Texas?
Mr, Pool. Yes, sir.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1347
Mr. Morrison [still flipping scrapbook pages]. These items are
from Houston. This is all Houston.
Mr. Pool. May I interrii pt here ? Do you have this going in Panama
and Venezuela?
Mr. Morrison. Yes, sir — excuse me. We have not liad it in Panama.
"We have not had it in Chile, so far, and of course the three Guianas.
It is merely because we have not had time to get around to it. We will
take students from Panama this year; yes, sir. We have taken about
160 students from Venezuela.
Mr. Pool. During the crisis we had several weeks ago in Panama,
did you have any students that had gone back to Panama ?
Mr. Morrison. I say we had not. Panama has not been included.
Mr. Pool, I see. It would have been quite interesting to have had a
report on their activities during that crisis, if we had had them dow^i
there.
Mr. jVIorrison. Yes, sir.
I would like to — would you read this? This is an editorial printed
in the Occidente, and it pretty well reflects the feeling of the news-
paper and the Latin public that have been exposed to the Operation
Amigo, and remember that this is printed in Colombia, please, sir.
Mr. McNamara [reading]. Operation Amigo, a Bulwark.
One of the fundamental aspects of good relationships among the inhabitants
of the world is people-to-people contact: a friendly interest in others and the
feeling of solidarity and mutual esteem that such relationships propagate.
An extraordinary cultural exchange has been taking place recently between
the students of Latin America and the United States. This kind of socializing
undoubtedly will have widespread influence on the future generations of all
our countries.
One of the most important of these programs is the so-called Operation Amigo,
which was initiated by the newspaper, the Miami Herald, and which today has
the support and collaboration of 28 Scripps-Howard and Copley newspapers.
In the development of their plans, numbers of Colombian students have visited
the United States and hundreds of North American youngsters have come down
to learn by direct experience about life as it is lived in Latin America.
Recently, Mr. H. Stuart Morrison, general coordinator for Latin America,
returned to Call where Operation Amigo has already found a generous and
enthusiastic welcome, to organize another Colombian-American student exchange.
This strengthening of ideological and cultural ties among nations defending
the same principles and belonging to the same system of free democracies is of
incalculable value to us all. A brand new force thus appears on the continent
to guard against the Castro-Communist avalanche trying to destroy the bonds
that have been our hope for the future in our struggle for progress.
To these young students— already so well versed in objective knov/ledge — will
fall the job of carrying on the preaching and the teaching of whatever we learn
from those who join with us in the defense of the ideal of social reform in this
continent.
The accomplishments of the Peace Corps, of the People-to-People campaign, of
Operation Amigo and others, are the solid bulwarks on which the friendship of
the nations of America rests. We need them today more than ever before as we
confront the dangers that threaten the free world.
Mr. Morrison. Mr. Pool, you asked about Venezuela. I was in
Venezuela shortly before the election. We took students as far south
as Puerto Ordaz, which is on the Orinoco Kiver in the eastern part
of Venezuela, Barcelona, Santa Thomas, every nook and cranny of
eastern Venezuela ; and the bombings that you heard about were not
performed by adults. They were 16-, 17-, 18-year-old kids working in
Commie cell blocs who went out and bombed the oil lines and bombed
this and machinegunned trains, and then they retreat back into the
universities, where they have a certain amount of immunity.
1348 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
It was open season on Yankees in Venezuela. There is no question
about that. But the Venezuelan people certainly are to be congratu-
lated for going out in force and voting during that election.
It is these kids that need our help, and they were just crying for
leadership, just crying for it. Won't somebody stand up and fight ?
I don't know the particulars about legislation, but I do know that
through private enterprise we had a theory that was reduced to prac-
tical application, without a lot of red tape, and we know it works. We
are not going to stop here. I have in the other brief case a proposal
to expand Operation Amigo. Right now we are working with me and
a secretary. That's our staff. I expect that next year we will be able
to bring up 2,000 students, with the unlimited resources that the United
States has, and the unlimited cooperation that you can get in Central
and South America — because we are one people in one hemisphere with
a common tie ; there is no doubt in my mind that news of the Freedom
Academy bill will certainly help hold this hemisphere together like it
should be.
I will answer any questions that I am capable of answering at this
time.
The Chairman. Well, I have two or three.
In 1960, or thereabouts
Mr. Morrison. Sir?
The Chairman. In 1960 or thereabouts, the AFL-CIO created the
American Institute for Free Labor Development Avith their own funds,
with headquarters in Washington, and apparently, according to my
understanding of its functions, this institute is doing the identical
work that you are doing — in the labor world, I am talking about —
namely, bringing labor leaders here from Latin America, teaching
them free, democratic imionism and Communist strategy and tactics,
and thereupon the graduates go back and, as I understand, have done
a magnificent job in preventing the takeover of the unions by the
Commimists, and perhaps recapturing some that were seized.
Anyway, we see the parallel, and apparently the few experiments
that have come to our observation are working.
Now, we have heard that the Academy concept would be better han-
dled through these private concepts, private undertakings; then, on
the other hand, we hear from the State Department that it should be
left alone ; and then we have heard from mighty knowledgeable peo-
ple that there must be some central source, some uniform research, and
studies that would be available to those engaged, such as you are, in
this effort, without displacing you in any way, and it would be avail-
able also to foreign nationals, not only from Latin America but else-
where, leaders in the labor world and business world and the manage-
ment world, and so on.
Now, I wish you would address yourself to how the Academy would
be useful in the areas I have described, and whether the idea of this
establishment should be left alone or should be left to private enter-
prise or private efforts. I wish you would comment on that.
Mr. Morrison. Well, if I understand your question, I think that
the Freedom Academy should be set up separate from the State
Department. Wliat I am about to say may not be popular, but I am
going to say it anyhow. There are many good people in the State
Department in Central and South America, but there are many people
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1349
in the State Department who are reluctant to make a decision. I know
from my own experience that, in some countries, if a person who is
attached to the Embassy dares to mix with the nationals, he would
be set aside by the official American colony, and this is what the
people in Central and South America resent. I think that if the
Freedom Academy or any institution was set up under the State De-
partment, it would lose its effectiveness in Latin America.
Does this answer your question ?
The Chairivian. Well, yes, partly ; but then, do you see the necessity
for it?
Mr. Morrison. For a central office ? Yes, sir.
The Chairman. As distinguished from universities, and that area.
Mr. Morrison. Yes, sir. And again I say, I don't know the rami-
fications of these bills or the differences in them. I know the basic
differences. Yes, there should be some central office where informa-
tion could be obtained, where training and research of specific prob-
lems in a trouble area could be examined. Yes, I do ; and I think that
the Latin student or the Latin professional, once you establish that
this office only attempts to tell the truth about the two systems or our
way of life, aside from party-line policy — if this is the correct ter-
minology— that once you establish that, then it becomes effective. And
this is only based upon my experience with Operation Amigo, because
when I first went to Central and South America, they thought I was
an arm of the U.S. Government; they did not believe me. They
thought I was another Yankee coming down there to trick them, but
we have proved our point, and now they say, "Welcome home, Mr.
Morrison."
The Chairman. Well, now, the Sate of Louisiana, the Legislature
of Louisiana, passed a bill making it compulsory to teach a course in
Democracy versus Communism. Those may not be the words, but
that's about it.
Mr. Morrison. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And that same concept has taken root in other
States. In your own State of Florida.
Mr. Morrison. Florida, yes, sir.
The Chairman. And a high school teacher testified before us, and
he made it easy for me, because he said, rather than having me say, that
the trouble with these courses is that there is so little known by the
run-of-the-mill high school teacher as to what to teach and how to go
about it, that most of the time — and that coincides with my experi-
ence— the teachers from the whole State of Louisiana, particularly
from my congressional district, because I happen to be chairman of
this committee, the type of information they want is a short-range,
do-it-day-before-yesterday type, such as "How many Communists are
there in my town, and how do we get rid of them?"
Mr. Morrison. You don't go about it that way ; no, sir.
The Chairman. Well, I know, but that is what convinces me or leads
me to the conviction that you and the high school teacher are right ;
that we need some central, reliable agency that will tell the truth and
make an objective judgment of what's going on.
Mr. Morrison. Yes, sir ; that is absolutely right.
The Chairman. Now, how to set it up — we have not reached that
yet?
30-471— 64— pt. 2 8
1350 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
Mr. Morrison. That's your business, but what we need is that agency.
The people in Latin America, as I say again, are crying for this in-
formation. I have had people say, "Well, I have written to the Cul-
tural Affairs Officer of this Embassy. He has not gotten any action."
There is evidently no central information office, and the Communists
are out working day and night. This is a 24-hour job with them.
Mr. Bruce. May I interrupt ?
The Chairman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Bruce. I have been acquainted with what your newspapers are
doing. They are doing a tremendous job.
The Chairman. Well, so have we all.
Mr. Bruce. We have watched with gTeat interest. Why can't the
publisher's association, nationally, the newspapers, who have so much
at stake, as we all do, take a cue from what you have done on your
Amigo program and, on their own, establish a Freedom Academy ? I
am concerned. I am concerned about — frankly, I am an ex-newsman.
Mr. Morrison. Yes, sir.
Mr. Bruce. And I am concerned about the lack of knowledge in the
news media of the full nature of the Communist movement. I sug-
gested to a publisher not too long ago that they could set up, working
together in the newspaper alliance, whatever it is, a school, so that
the men in the working press can have more than just the surface
impression of a struggle between the Communist empire and the
Western World, because it is much deeper than that, but nothing has
happened.
Mr. JMoRRisoN. Yes, sir. We have — of course, I can't speak for John
S. Knight nor Mr. Copley nor Charley Scripps nor Jack Howard.
This would be an excellent idea, of course. I think that the news-
paper industry is finally — well, let me not say "finally" — is awakening
to this point and, in their own way, are trying to spread the gospel to
some of our Midwestern States that sort of don't even Iniow Cuba is
down there. You know, we are 90 miles away from Communist Cuba
in Florida.
Mr. Bruce. Well, I want to amend your statement. I think the
Midwestern States are quite alert to that,
Mr. Morrison. Okay, fine.
In the Miami Herald^ as well as other newspaper offices, they are
holding seminars pertaining to the newspaper industry periodically,
sir, and are attempting to get into this area.
Now, about as far as establishing a school, I can't answer that.
Mr. Bruce. But would not this give much more freedom to the
Freedom Academy if it were set up under private sponsorship with
all the conflict that inevitably is going to come between the executive
branch and the Freedom Academy? I just don't see how you can do
this without having this impasse reached when they begin to hit pay
dirt in the Freedom Academy.
]\Ir. Morrison. Yes.
Mr. Bruce. They begin to upset the status quo, then the pressures
come back on, and it is an embarrassment. I just don't know.
The Chairman. May we go off the record ?
C Discussion off the record.)
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1351
The Chairman. At this ]:)oint, Mr. Christopher Emmet will appear.
Mr. Emmet, we are glad to have you with us. And for the record,
I wish you "would give a thumbnail description of your background
and your occupation and education, and then proceed.
STATEMENT OF CHRISTOPHER EMMET
Mr. Emmet. Well, I am very happy and honored to be allowed to
give my support to the Freedom Academy bill. I have been aware
and active in some way in connection with the Communist problem
mostof my life.
I personally first observed the diabolical treacherous nature of the
Communist movement when I was a student in Germany. I saw that
the Communists directed their campaign against Democrats and indi-
rectly, and in some cases directly, helped the Nazis against the German
Republic. There were certain strikes which they made in common.
There were key elections where the Communists threw their votes to
the same candidates as the Nazis, in their common hatred of democracy.
And, of course, they hoped that the Nazis would be a passing phase.
I perhaps should have said that I am a free-lance writer, I have
written on politics in many publications. I have a radio program in
New York which I have been moderator of for the last 25 years, the
Foreign Affairs Round Table. I have been correspondent for a Ger-
man weekly newspaper in New York and I have been active in many
organizations.
During the thirties, because of my experience with the Nazis in
Germany and my fear that Hitler would surely go into the aggression
which he did, I was active in the anti-Nazi movement. I founded one
of the boycott committees, a committee called the Volmiteer Chris-
tian Committee to boycott Nazi Germany, and we cooperated with
Jewish boycott organizations and with the American Federation of
Labor, which had a labor boycott against Nazi goods because of their
oppression of the labor unions.
The Chairman. Was that during the regime of AFL President
William Green ?
Mr. Emmet. Yes. I then had a personal experience with Communist
treachery. Wlien the Hitler-Stalm Pact was formed, there were many
anti-Nazi organizations which cooperated loosely. My committee
never cooperated with any Communist committee, but secretly, there
were Communists in some of the anti-Nazi committees with whom we
did cooperate in connection with the boycott and in our exposures of
Nazi propaganda. Wlien the Hitler-Stalin Pact was signed, immedi-
ately some of these organizations were paralyzed by key Communist
personnel who had been infiltrated. There was one very big commit-
tee that was headed by the late Senator Lehman, Walter Damrosch,
and other wonderful names. I think it was called the Council Against
Nazi Aggression. It had large funds and was very active.
Wlien the Hitler-Stalin Pact was signed, that committee was para-
lyzed. They never issued another statement — and, of course, the war
started right after the pact was signed. Some of the people who had
been most active, most effective, most militant in the anti-Nazi organi-
zations, and some that I personally worked with in the secretariat
level, turned out to have been Communists, because they turned against
1352 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
US overnight and began screaming about British colonialism in India :
"Do you want us to get into a war to help enslave the Indian people?"
You see, all of a sudden, from having been talking about nothing but
Nazi atrocities, there was a reversal, just like that.
So although before the war I was mainly engaged in exposing the
danger of Nazi and Japanese aggression, I was conscious of the Com-
munist danger. Therefore, during the war, I headed an informal
opposition to the Communist agitation for a second front. If you re-
member, the Communists during the war were screaming for a second
front, demanding that the U.S. and Britain make a premature land-
ing in France to take the heat off Russians, even though the American
Armies and the British Armies might have been destroyed. Thus, the
Communists risked a Nazi victory just to take the heat off Russia a
little earlier. Stalin even attacked the British for failure to invade
Europe in October 1941, which was only a few months after the fall of
France. He demanded that the British invade with their wretched
little army.
Then in 1943 Stalin attacked the U.S. when we invaded North
Africa instead of the Continent. The Communists sucked in peo-
ple like Wendell Willkie to enter this agitation, many well-meaning
citizens, who said, "The brass hats, the America generals, don't want
to risk their troops, so they are delaying the second front," and "the
Russians are dying for us." It was an elaborate Communist opera-
tion. Well, I had my radio program and I was permitted by the
station, WEVD, to combat this agitation, and I wrote letters to papers
and got up a joint statement, and so on.
Then after the war, I founded the Committee Against Mass Expul-
sions, which attempted to publicize the mass deportations by the Com-
munists of German-speaking people, regardless of whether they were
Nazi or anti-Nazi, when they came into Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hun-
gary, Rumania, and Yugoslavia. There were large German-speaking
minorities in those countries, mostly solid citizens, small businessmen,
shopkeepers, skilled workers. Their deportation was part of the Com-
munist plan to exacerbate national hatreds between Germans and Slavs
and thus help them to communize the Slavs because of fear of the Ger-
mans. They also hoped that the mass of refugees would help com-
munize Germany. So when the Russian Armies occupied all of those
countries of Eastern Europe, they encouraged and forced the expul-
sion of every one of these German-speaking citizens. The total
amounted to somewhere in the neighborhood of 14 million — if you in-
clude the German citizens in the eastern part of Germany which was
taken over by Poland. There were nearly three million of them ex-
pelled from Czechoslovakia, half a million from Hungary and so on.
Because this was a neglected issue, we knew very little about it
here; it was hard to get the information from behind the Russian
Armies ; only the churches, the Quakers, and a few relief organizations
could get in, so that we formed this committee to try to publicize that
monstrous Soviet crime which was occurring at the same time as the
Nuremberg trials. While we were trying the Nazi leaders — and in my
opinion, rightly so — for some of their crimes, including that of depor-
tation, the Soviet Union was carrying out an even greater deportation
than Hitler had even been able to cari-y out, right at that very
moment.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1353
Sidney Hook was one of the members of that committee, a profes-
sor of philosophy in New York University, a great American educa-
tor, a great American philosopher, and he was the one who inspired
me and helped to organize that committee with me. He did not
want to be chairman, so I was the chairman of it. Norman Thomas,
Dorothy Thompson, the Reverend John Haynes Holmes, and Father
John LaFarge were among its members.
Then we began to get news of the forced repatriation of DP's. This
had nothing to do with the Germans. The displaced persons were
defined as citizens of Eastern Europe or the Soviet Union or members
of the Jewish minority in Germany, who were deported from their
homes and used as slave labor after the Nazi occupation of their home-
lands. Among them were citizens of the Baltic States — Lithuania,
Latvia, and Estonia — whose countries had been annexed by the Soviet
Union and enslaved by communism. The Soviets regarded them as
Soviet citizens. Other anti-Communists among the DP's who did not
want to return were members of minority nationalities in Russia, such
as the Ukrainians. But there were also an enormous number of
Russians themselves, including soldiers who had been prisoners of
the Nazis, who did not want to return.
We will never know how many were forcibly repatriated through
one form of pressure or another, but we do know that thousands
resisted forcibly and that there were even tragic cases of mass suicide.
Well, we formed a committee called the Refugee's Defense Commit-
tee, which General Donovan was the chairman of, and of which David
Martin, who is now assistant to Senator Dodd, was the secretary. I
was the treasurer of it. We tried to expose these Communist crimes
which were occurring and which our Government and the Allied Gov-
ernments were unconsciously collaborating with, under the momentmn
of the wartime alliance and agreements with Russia. Naturally the
U.S. Army assumed that the Soviet DP's wanted to go home. The
UNRRA organization was set up to help these people to go home, and
the U.S. Army was instructed to return the prisoners of war who had
been captured by the Germans, yet many of the Soviet prisoners of
war in Germany did not want to go back. Hundreds of thousands of
Soviet prisoners of war had volunteered to join General Vlasov's army.
General Vlasov had been an able Communist general, who had been
captured by the Nazis. He asked the Nazis to let him raise volunteers
among the Russian prisoners to fight for freedom in Russia, and Hitler
originally promised to let him do that. But when Vlasov saw what
the Nazis were doing in Russia, the deal was off. He did not col-
laborate in the Nazi crimes. Nevertheless, he and his followers were
forcibly delivered to the Soviets by the U.S. Army for execution under
the wartime agreements.
Then the fact that I have worked in the writing and radio fields,
gives me a special interest, of course, in the question of propaganda
and information. I have been warmly and enthusiastically support-
ing the Freedom Academy bill since I first heard of it from Mr. Alan
Grant about 11 years ago. At that time, after elaborating this plan
with his friends in the Orlando group and having gone to Washington
with it and having run into delays in Washington, Mr. Grant came to
New York. He first wrote to a number of people who were interested
in the anti -Communist movement, and among others, Sidney Hook and
1354 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
Leo Cherne uiid one olhoi- rriond of mine, Arthur McDowell of the
Upholsterers' Union, who is here (oday, and many others. We met
at that lime in New York in an eiVort to see ii' we coidd not carry out
this plan on a pi-i\ate basis with the support of foundation money.
Congressman JU'uce asked wdietlier it would not be ideal if this
Freedom Academy could be set up entirely as a private enterj^rise. At
that time, we attempted to do that and we had the support of some
very distinu^uished citizens, includino; General Clay, former Governor
Dewey, and IFeni'v Luce, of 7'hne-Lifr, but we failed. In my opinion,
the diflicullies of linancin<^ an o])eratioii of this sort privately are
insuperabU\ because of the vast area of responsibilities which private
hnancinii,' nnist take care of.
For that reason, I endorse wholeheartedly ih(\ bill introduced by
Representative Bo^j^^s, antl the same bill that Senator Douo;las and
Senator Mundt have introduced in the Senate. I am convinced that
this would bo a ^reat step forward in increasinf^ knowledf^e of com-
numism and efl'ective resistance to conununism and, in my opinion,
increasin<ii; American national unity.
We all know one of i]w problems which you mentioned, Mr. Chair-
man— the school ])rincii)al's question: "ITow do we teach commu-
nism?"— which is based on the enormous complexity of the issue and
the impingement of controversial questions, such as how far does com-
munism connect with socialism or with })acilism?
The distiiiiifuished (\>minission of experts and authorities, appointed
by i\w I'resident. and confirmed by the Senate under this bill, would
undoubtedly serve to unify and reduce tlie areas and the confusions
about this issue and to satisfy a <i^reat deal of io;n()rant, frustrated,
and well-meanin<i^ anticommunism expressed by peojde who can't be
expected to know. 'Jliey see things going wrong, and therefore some-
times they express their anticommunism in unwise, gullible, naive,
extreme forms.
Well, now, if there Mere an active, independent U.S. Government
agency under this bill, which was promoting education and training
on (^ommunist methods of subversion, obviously the Commission
would have to be very careful in its statements on current events.
It would have to be unanimous in exi)ressing statements in a con-
troversial area. However, the mere flow of factual information from
such a soiirce, the training of people, the collecting of the real experts,
of whom there are thousands in this country now on comnuniism,
from the Kand Corporation School, the uni\ersities, and the War
Colleges, would be a great ach'ance.
The CiiAiniMAN. Well, assuming there is some sort of a division be-
tween the Kremlin and Peiping, that does not erase the necessity for
the Academy ; or does it ?
Mr. EiNiMET. No, I don't think it does. Which isn't to say that the
difference between Moscow and Peiping is not real. In the long run,
it is obviously something that we should welcome, but the ell'ect of it
now, the initial effect, is simply to make us complacent for the reasons
outlined in my ]irepared statement.
We get the ])icturo that Khrushchev is the milder of the two great
Communist leaders, that Mr. Khruschev is being attacked by Mao
Tse-tung because he is too mild. Therefore, Mr. Khrnshchev is one
of the good guys, and Mao Tse-tung is the bad guy. Yet this ignores
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COIVIMISSION 1355
two things : It ignores the fact that Mao Tse-timg is weaker today than
he was 5 yeiirs ago, when Russia was giving hiiu aid. His military
establishment has deteriorated because of the lack of Russian aid. He
depends on Soviet oil. Mao Tsc-tung can't light a big war; he prob-
abl}' used up all his oil reserves when he attacked India in a 3-week
blitz on the frontier, a blulf to make himself look great against a weak
and neglected Indian Arm3^
Khrushchev is the uian who has 1,000, 10,000 times the power of Mao.
He is the man with the power, yet the eft'ect of the Sino-Soviet conflict
is to make us look at Mao as if he were the only danger. Of course,
he is a danger in the sense of his ability to help the Vietnamese, but it
was Khrushchev who nuiinly contributed to the danger in Laos. With-
out Laos, w^e would not be having the trouble in Vietnam today. Day
after day U.S. observation planes reported that it was the Soviet trans-
port planes which were flying arms into Laos. Repeatedly the State
Department I'onfirmed this.
If I may, I will just read one paragraph from my prepared state-
ment. It omits Khrushchev's bloody record as one of Stalin's most
faithful henchmen, and looks only at the record since Khrushchev
came to power. The record is more aggressive than Stalin's. I quote :
Who was the butcher of Budapest, who hninched a new Soviet military iuva-
siou on November 4tli after announcing that Soviet Armies would be evacuated
from Hungary? Who ordered the kidnaping of General Maleter, who was
negotiating with the Russians under a Hag of truce, and of Premier Nagy, who
was traveling under a "safe conduct" whicli the Communists had granted to the
Yugoslav Embassy? Who laum'hed the Berlin ultiiuatum in 1958 and renewed
it with greater pressure in 1SH>1, when President Kennedy had to worsen our
dollar deficit by the enormous military buildup? Who broke up the Paris con-
ference with his wild denunciation of President Eisenliower l>ecause of the
U-2 nights, when the Soviet Union itself boasted that it had known about these
U-2 flights for years l>efore the Paris conference was called? Who supplieti and
transiH>rted the arms for Communist subversion and aggression into Laos,
according to tlie State Department?
Wiu) tritHl to put the missiles in Cuba under cover of a doublecross of President
Kennedy by Khrushchev's private promises that Tiothing of the sort would ever
be done? Who blockwl the Autobahn last summer, and then lied about which
side had surrendered when his bluff was called?
You remember the American businessmen and INIr. Keith Funston,
president of the New York Stock Exchange, were sickened by having
to listen to tliese Soviet lies. Yet apparently the othei'^ felt it was
impolite to contradict them.
Who gave the order which led to the repeated shooting down and killing of
iinarmed American airmen, while the West has permitted innumerable Soviet
overtlights without any retaliation? Instead, we talk alx)ut punishing our own
llyers for having gone astray.
The Chairman. May Ave go oil' the record'^
(Discussion oflf the record.)
The CuAiRiMAN. I want to get your views on two questions.
Oin' (Constitution being what it is with reference to the conduct of
foreign policy, do you see any objection or any wisdom in tlie Freedom
Academy having an advisory group drawn from these agencies that
were mentioned, CIA, State iVpartment, FBI, and so on?
Mr. Emivikt. No sir; I think that, as far as I am concerned, the bill
seems to me to be A-ery Avell thought out to deal Avith the problem of
coordination. The independence, I approve a hundred percent, its
1356 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
being an independent agency. It seems to me that the other bill pro-
posed by Senator Symington would be totally inadequate. You know
the State Department wanted control of foreign aid, they wanted
control of USIA. They naturally would like to control any U.S. Gov-
ernment activity which affects foreign policy. Diplomats are trained
to want to play their cards close to their vests, and not to complicate
matters. The State Department has its own tremendous job, but psy-
chologically, diplomats are unqualified to engage in any form of propa-
ganda. The training of a diplomat and the training of a propagan-
dist is a complete opposite, so I think it is simply important that the
Academy should be completely independent. But there should and
would be close liaison tlirough the Advisory Committee of Govern-
ment agencies provided under the bill.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Should Members of Congress be included in that
Advisory Committee?
Mr. Emmet. That would be fine as far as I am concerned, if it is
practicable. But in any case, the Commission, as an independent
agency, would have to report to Congress as well as the President;
would it not ?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Emmet. So that it seems to me that the plan of the bill is
magnificently constructed.
The Chairman. Mr. Johansen?
Mr. Johansen. I have just one question. I don't raise this to get
into a controversial area, but to try to illustrate the very realistic prob-
lems that might arise. Supposing we had a statement of the very con-
troversial character of that of Senator Fulbright and supposing we
had in existence this Freedom Academy, what contribution or what
role might this Academy have in relation to statements and pronounce-
ments of the type of Senator Fulbright's regarding the inevitability
of communism and all the rest that we are going to have to live with ?
Mr. Emmet. Well, it would simply reinforce the situation we have
now — I mean, the Freedom Commission would not interfere with Sen-
ator Fulbright. And presumably would not assay the speech. But
they would have already released information which would contradict
his thesis that Castro is only a nuisance, etc., just as other U.S. Gov-
ernment agencies have released information which answers Senator
Fulbright. For instance. Secretary Rusk has contradicted Fulbright's
theory about changed Soviet intentions, as well as about Castro. Rusk
and Governor Harriman have repeatedly stated that Soviet aims have
not changed. Now, Senator Fulbright said Soviet intentions have
changed. He also attacked U.S. policy on Panama and was answered
by McGeorge Bundy. Mr. Bundy also said on Sunday he did not think
anything would be more dangerous than to encourage the impression
that Cuba was not a menace to the United States. If you had your
Freedom Commission, you would simply have much more information
which would back up that sort of thing. It would not be necessary
for the Freedom Commission itself to indulge in such debates on U.S.
policy, but it would provide the backup of facts.
In other words, if Fulbright was right, fine; but the facts don't
indicate that he's right, and the Freedom Commission could help prove
that he was not.
The Chairman. In that particular case.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1357
Mr. Emmet. Yes, in that particular case.
The Chairman. Wliereas, vis-a-vis other statements, they might
J) rove they were right ?
Mr. Emmet. That's right.
The Chairman. Off the record.
(Discussion off the record.)
The Chairman. I think, sir, that you have made a great contri-
bution to these hearings.
Mr. Emmet. I think, sir, that I can submit a statement Later, and
then you don't need to listen to me further.
Mr. Bruce. I commend you on your analysis of the Sino-Soviet
so-called split. It is excellent, excellent.
Mr. EiNiMET. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you.
(Mr. Emmet's prepared statement follows :)
STATEMENT OF CHRISTOPHER EMMET
I am happy and honored to have this opportunity to join the many dis-
tinguished men who have endorsed the Freedom Academy bill.
I have been interested in the Freedom Academy jilan for 11 years, together
with several close personal friends, including Leo Cherne, Professor Sidney
Hook, Eugene Lyons, and Arthur McDowell of the Upholsterers' Union. At
that time we and others were approached in New York by the Orlando Commit-
tee, which created the plan. Recent events in Latin America, Africa, and
Southeast Asia show that establishment of the Freedom Academy is more neces-
sary than ever; hence, I strongly urge passage of H.R. 5368.
The basic need of the bill and the reasons for its siTecific provisions have all
been exhaustively discussed before this committee. I do not want to take up
your time by going over the gromid already covered by highly qualified exjterts.
It will be most useful, with your permission, to confine myself here to answering
a few of the main arguments against it.
One argument advanced against the Freedom Academy bill suggests passing
the bill for the National Academy of Foreign Affairs in its place. This pro-
posal is thoroughly answered by Mr. Alan Grant in Supplement No. 1 to the
"Green Book," which compares the two bills.
Another argument is presented by the distinguished head of the State De-
partment Planning Section, Professor Walt Rostow, who has shown himself
sympathetic to some of the objectives of the Freedom Academy bill in the past.
Mr. Rostow said :
"As I read the literature and read the testimony of the Freedom Commission
advocates, I sometimes feel they are somewhat out of date. Our private insti-
tutions are now committed to work abroad on a very large scale, in every quar-
ter of the globe."
This argument has been well answered in the "Green Book" I have before
me, especially pages 38-54, including the quotations from Allen Dulles, C. D.
Jackson, Stefan Possony, and President Kennedy.
This argument of Professor Rostow's connects up with another argument,
which is that our situation vis-a-vis communism has not only improved because
of our greater present knowledge about Communist methods, but also because the
Communist danger itself has been greatly weakened by developments within
the Communist world — therefore, the Freedom Academy plan is no longer urgent.
It is true there has been a great and welcome increase in studies of com-
munism over the past decade. However, university-type studies of communism
and "Kremlinology" tend to focus attention on the cJmnges in the Communist
world and the differences between Communist countries, rather than on the
continuation and perfection of the Communist apparatus and its subversive
operations abroad.
Of course, the changes have taken place; they are important and should be
studied. However, the emphasis on Communist changes, the anticipation that
they will continue, and the speculation as to the effect on Soviet foreign policy
all tend to obscure the record of the hard facts about the past actions of
Khrushchev and Mao. Thus their effect is to substitute speculations about
1358 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
changed Communist intentions for the study of Communist capabilities for
subversion and aggression. Even pi'esent Communist operations in Latin Amer-
ica, Africa, and Asia tend to be obscured. This is the impact of Kremlinology.
Still less is there any education or training in methods of combating Communist
subversion, except in the purely military field of guerrilla warfare.
All of the above tendencies in the work of some academic experts on com-
munism are aggravated and distorted by the attitude of the free world's press,
because novelty has news value. Change or alleged changes and splits within
the formerly monolithic Communist bloc have news value, so the press and
magazines automatically play them up for the same reason they play up differ-
ences between the U.S. and its NATO allies.
Thus a new image begins to emerge of Khrushchev as an enlightened Com-
munist, almost a friend of the West, who is threatened by the belligerent Mao.
This, in turn, creates the kind of complacency and overconfidence which was
expressed in Senator Fulbright's speech, in which he ridicules those who still
believe in the danger from Khnishchev and from the majority of Communist
countries whose policies he still largely controls.
The record of democratic alliances against aggressive states throughout
history shows that complacency leads to unwillingness to continue the required
sacrifices. It was so with the British-led alliances against Louis XIV and
against Napoleon. It was true in the erosion of the alliance against Hitler in
the 1930's, and it threatens to prove true of our alliance against Soviet and
Chinese communism today.
Think of Khrushchev's actual record, shown by the hard facts of recent
history, compared to the image of him we see today. Omitting Khrushchev's
bloody record since he came to power as one of Stalin's most faithful henchmen,
it is more aggressive than Stalin's. Who was the butcher of Budapest, who
launched a new Soviet military invasion on November 4th after announcing
that Soviet Armies would be evacuated from Hungary? Who ordered the kid-
naping of General Maleter, who was negotiating with the Russians under a flag
of truce, and of Premier Nagy, who was traveling under a "safe conduct" which
the Communists had granted to the Yugoslav Embassy? Who launched the
Berlin ultimatum in 1958 and renewed it with greater pressure in 1961, when
President Kennedy had to worsen our dollar deficit by the enormous military
buildup? Who broke up the Paris conference with his wild denunciation of
President Eisenhower because of the TJ-2 flights, when the Soviet Union itself
boasted that it had known about these U-2 flights for years before the Paris
conference was called? Who supplied and transported the arms for Com-
munist subversion and aggression into Laos, according to the State Depart-
ment?
Who tried to put the missiles in Cuba under cover of a doublecross of Presi-
dent Kennedy by Khrushchev's private promises tliat nothing of the sort would
ever be done? Who blocked the Autobahn last summer, and then lied about
which side had surrendered when his bluff was called? Who gave the order
which led to the repeated shooting down and killing of unarmed American
airmen, while the West has permitted innumerable Soviet overflights without
any retaliation? Instead, we talk about punishing our own flyers, for having
gone astray.
There has been no progress in the disarmament field, despite the hopes aroused
by the test ban treaty. Also, Khrushchev's efforts to divide NATO by reviving
fears of German militarism have been stepped up, not diminished, in recent
months. Lastly there is increasing evidence of a real and only thinly dis-
guised anti-Semitism in the U.S.S.R.
It is also worth remembering that the Castro attack on Venezuela, which
has .lust been exposed by the Organization of American States, was only made
possible by Khrushchev and that the Brazilian revolution only prevented at the
last minute a Goulart dictatorship in Brazil, while Goulart had become increas-
ingly dependent on the Communists.
The greatest danger in all this optimism about the Sino-Soviet split is that
Khrushchev, who is emerging as a hero of the Western free press, is infinitely
more powerful than Mao Tse-tung with his "horse and buggy" economy, his anti-
quated military machine, and his lack of nuclear weapons.
We must also remember that insofar as Khrushchev wishes to prevent Mao
from capturing the allegiance of more Communist parties he must compete with
Mao by proving that the Soviet method of coexistence, plus subversion, produces
greater Communist advances in subverting the free world. In short, the effect
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1359
of Mao on Khrushchev, if any, must be to step up the pace of Soviet subversive
activities.
As regards Khrushchev's capabilities, U.S. superiority in most nuclear weapons,
plus the Soviet economic crisis, have at least temporarily reduced Khrushchev's
willingness to risk nuclear war. as well as his capacity to wage aggressive
economic warfare, as in his oil offensive. However, he has not given up a single
power base, nor agreed to any infringement of Soviet secrecy by inspection. Yet
only elaborate inspection would hamper Soviet capacity to launch a sneak attack
or to resume missile-threat diplomacy.
The belief that relaxation of police-state rule in Russia and Eastern Europe
weakens the Soviet capacity or desire for aggi-ession is another fallacy. We must
remember that Hitler's Nazi regime was far less totalitarian in its economic con-
trols and general police-state control of free speech, etc., than Khrushchev's
empire is today. Yet that increased rather than diminished Hitler's capacity
to wage war against nearly all the world. The relaxation in Russia today, as
formerly in Nazi Germany, tends to reduce hatred of the totalitarian regime and
increase cooperation by scientists and military leaders with the regime, without
affecting the secret decisions in the Kremlin on war or peace.
We are also told that we should be nice to Khrushchev and help him solve his
economic troubles by East-West trade and credit, lest Khrushchev lose his power
to allegedly more militant forces in the Kremlin, such as Marshal Malinovsky.
But whether there is any such danger to Khrushchev and whether his opponents
or successors would really be more militant, is wholly unproved. Even Mao has
actually been more cautious than Khrushchev, in deeds though not words ; and
even if it is true that Khrushchev is the "best" Communist, how do we know that
he will win? How do we know that we will not be solving the economic crisis
for the benefit of Khrushchev's aggressive successors?
In connection with the Freedom Academy bill, it is clear that both the Soviets
and the Chinese have perfected and refined their weapons of subversion and
guerrilla warfare. The Viet Cong is a more efficient guerrilla operation than was
ever mounted by Mao Tse-tung in China, according to experts in this field. The
coup in Zanzibar, the riots in Panama, and the drift toward communism in Ghana
and elsewhere in Africa, testify to the extension of Communist subversion.
We have tried to prevent the conditions which prepare the way for communism
in Latin America and Africa by the Alliance for Progress, foreign aid, and the
Peace Corps. But the economic difficulties in Latin America and the growing
chaos in Africa show how impossible it is to get quick results by economic and
humanitarian help alone, especially in view of the population explosion and the
flight of capital. To gain time for economic aid and political reforms to suc-
ceed, we must be able to hold the line in the political battle with the Communists.
How else can we hope to do this except by new methods of training to combat
the Communist perfection of political conflict?
The emphasis placed on the training of foreign students and on American
private citizens in the Freedom Academy bill would be justified by recent develop-
ments in Latin America and Africa alone. The chief Communist troublemakers
there were local people, trained in Communist schools in Russia, China, Cuba,
and/or the satellites. They can only be successfully blocked and exposed by local
people who have been given anti-Communist training by us.
May I stress one more reason for recommending the establishment of the
Freedom Academy with all possible urgency? As stressed in the text of the
bill itself, everything which will be taught by the Freedom Academy must be
in harmony with our Western allies. Even if we establish the Freedom Acad-
emy, the Soviets will still have many weapons which we will lack — such as their
capacity to launch war of aggression by secret sneak attacks, their ability to
break solemn agreements, their power to coerce their so-called allies by military
and economic pressure, their ability to intimidate small countries by threaten-
ing aggression, their capacity to bribe politicians and newspaper editors on a
lavish scale, their willingness to kidnap and assassinate key anti-Communist
leaders where they can safely do so.
Therefore, the least we can do is to use the power of education and technical
training to the greatest conceivable extent in our fight for freedom's survival.
The Chairman. We will stand in recess until quarter to two.
(Whereupon, at 12 :30 p.m., Tuesday, April 7, 1964, the committee
recessed, to reconvene at 1 :45 p.m. the same day.)
1360 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
AFTERNOON SESSION, TUESDAY, APRIL 7, 1964
^The committee reconvened at 2 p.m., Hon. Joe Pool presiding.)
(Committee members present : Representatives Pool, Ichord, Johan-
sen, Bruce, and Schadeberg.)
Mr. Pool. The committee will come to order.
Mr. Morrison, I believe some of the committee members would like
to ask you some questions if you don't mind.
Mr. Morrison. Yes.
STATEMENT OF H. STUART MORRISON— Resumed
Mr. JoHANSEN. I had one question. Did I understand correctly that
this Operation Amigo is a two-way street? In other words, you are
sending some United States students to Latin American countries
as well as the other way around? Is that corect?
Mr. Morrison. As it turns out, that is correct. Operation Amigo
is a private organization chartered to bring Latin American students
to the United States. Operation Amigo, Inc., does not sponsor di-
rectly the return of U.S. students to Latin America. However, we
have seen to it that they are indirectly helped.
Now, the other portion of that question could be answered in this
way. The clubs that we have established in Central and South Amer-
ica, to the tune of about 4,000 students, through our direction invite
these students down and perform the same tasks that we do here.
Mr. JoHANSEN. That cleared up the point. That is all I have.
Mr. Pool. Mr. Bruce?
Mr. Bruce. Mr. Morrison, repeat again, if you would, the cost per
student of Operation Amigo.
Mr. Morrison. This is a little hard to determine. There are direct
contribution costs. You can say it cost x-number of dollars to do
this. Then there are certain donations that you can't put your finger
on, such as the housing of the student by a U.S. family. It costs
x-number of dollars to do this plus community response, and so forth.
The actual transportation cost could be broken down to about
$225 per student. I would say that the cost in programing this
particular student through one phase of Operation Amigo would
come close to approximately $350.
Mr. Bruce. The operation is on the basis of a tax-exempt founda-
tion?
Mr. Morrison. Yes.
Mr. Bruce. How long has it been operating ?
Mr. Morrison. Since 1962.
Mr. Bruce. How many States have you entered ?
Mr. Morrison. We now have entered approximately 16 to 18 States,
but this is not a true reflection of its acceptability because we do have
on file approximately 200 school jurisdictions within the United States
wanting to receive students.
Mr. Bruce. Now mainly, the direction of this has been through
newspaper operation and cooperation ?
Mr. Morrison. The control of the program remains within the
newspaper industry, yes. We have had, certainly, collateral partici-
pation from different civic groups, Kiwanis, Rotary, Lions, B'nai
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1361
B'rith. In fact, B'nai B'rith has adopted the program on a nation-
wide program. International Kiwanis wants to come into sponsoring
it, International Rotary, International Lions, and the YMCA.
We have had tremendous commmiity response.
Mr. Bruce. As I understand your testimony earlier, the greatest
value is the fact when you move into the city you do not regard it as
an agent of the United States Government, but rather an interested
American citizen ; is this an accurate approach ?
Mr. Morrison. Correct — who has an honest intent and desire to
exchange ideas on an equal basis with the countries and students of
Central and South America.
Mr, Bruce. Are you dealing in this program directly with the
ideology of communism or is it more on the exposure of the free
system as a counterbalance?
Mr. Morrison. It is more on the exposure of this free system in
comparison to the Communist system.
Mr. Bruce. Do you keep in touch with the Latin American stu-
dents after they go back ?
Mr. Morrison. Through these Operation Amigo clubs, yes. As a
matter of fact, I told you about the committee for the selection of the
students which were composed of national leaders, newspaper people,
et cetera. Since the Operation Amigo clubs have been established, in
order to retain their interest in the program, we also let the clubs
elect a representative to sit in on the future selection of any other
Latin American student.
Mr. Bruce. How do you propose
Mr. Morrison. One other point while I think of it, approximately
65 percent of the students who participated in the program in 1962
and 1963 are now at the university level.
Mr. Bruce. Where they are needed?
Mr. Morrison. Yes.
Mr. Bbuce. How do you propose to take a successful operation like
Amigo and coordinate it with a Freedom Academy, or do you ?
Mr. Morrison. I had not really seriously given any thought to this
before you asked the question. It would appear to me that the Free-
dom Academy, if established — and I am sure that some method should
be established or some area of responsibility — would first of all need
students from Latin America to participate. It seems to me that
Operation Amigo with its tremendous contacts in Central and South
America has a readymade organization to select some of these partici-
pants from. This is my offhand opinion,
Mr. Bruce. Now taking that, which is the point I was coming to,
you point out that you think one of the great assets of Operation
Amigo is its lack of a tie with an official agency.
Mr. Morrison. Correct.
Mr. Bruce. Would you not then blunt some of this great value you
have under your present operation?
Mr. Morrison. You mean, if you were to select some of the students
in the Operation Amigo clubs ; is that what you are talking about ?
Mr. Bruce. Yes.
Mr. Morrison. I feel like I am on the proverbial spot, but this would
greatly be determined by the method in which the Freedom Academy
would be set up. I think it would be completely separate from any
1362 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMIVIISSION
State Department affiliation. It would be wonderful to set a Freedom
Academy up, and I think it should be set up. but you would not want
to spend all this money and yet have it inelfectual.
JNIr. Bruce, I am just wondering, though, if the very thing that you
have found to be your great asset, the freedom of operation, would
not be jeopardized somewhat by Govermnent entering into the picture?
Mr. Morrison. I don't know how close Government would enter into
the Freedom Academy.
Mv. Bruce. It would be a Government operation as I understand it.
I think all of these bills are as a Government operation. Am I correct
on that?
Mr. JoHANSEN. Yes.
JNIr. Bruce. It would be total Government, and I am just wondering
if you would not perhaps blunt this great asset that you have of a free
American citizen united with a Government agency projecting it?
Mr. Morrison. Well, you might; but as you know, the politicians
in Latin America are as free as the winds. There are many ways of
accomplishing what you want, not necessarily to the direct approach.
I think that the correct type of student could be obtained from an
academy.
Mr. Bruce. Thank you, very much. Your testimony has been ex-
cellent.
^Ir. JoHANSEN. ]May I make this observation regarding your tes-
timony, and I agree with 1113" colleague that it has been excellent. One
of the enigmas to me, and this applies to the Peace Corps and some
of these other programs, is how we exemplify private enterprise or
free enterprise, or whatever you want to call it, nongovernmental ac-
tivity, in these other countries by doing it under Government S])onsor-
ship. It seems to me that is the pitfall that you avoided in this
program.
Mr. INIoRRisoN. Yes.
Mr. JoHANSEN. I am tremendously interested and impressed with
it. I don't think that whatever is Government-sponsored is necessarily
automatically bad. I do think that in a mortal combat with totali-
tarianism if we can't be the missionaries for the nongovermnental ap-
proach, we are missing the whole point of the conflict.
Mr. ]\IoRRisoN. That is right. Your Communist approach to this
problem in a very logical way, their embassies, ambassadors are just as
much government as yours could be only they are smart about it.
They bring them to Russia and go to a particular school, but they are
also sent over to this specialized school in this area and they don't
come back as attached to the Russian Government, but yet they have
been there and they know and they work hard when they get back.
Mr. Bruce. May I interject here for a moment ?
Don't you think the very basic difference is in goal and in method
of operation? The Communist is determined to conquer the world,
whether he is a Chinese Communist or a Russian Connnunist, operat-
ing on a clearly outlined scientific pattern, whereas the United States
and the Western World in general is a polyglot without any central di-
rection by any nature of the free society ?
Mr. Morrison. Correct.
Mr. Bruce. Then, does it not come down to the fact that private
groups basically are going to have to take the initiative?
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1363
Mr. Morrison-. I think tlie private groups certainly have a part, a
definite part, a very decided part, and we have got to fight this com-
munistic onslaught in the way they direct it. We have got to take the
initiative and not sit back and say, "Well, everything is going to be
all right."
Mr. Bruce. Thank you.
]\Ir. Pool. I want to second what the gentleman said. We appre-
ciate your testimony. It has been very excellent, and your experience
has been very helpful to the committee.
Mr. IcHORD. Mr. Chairman, I came in late. I don't know whether
I followed all of the answers to Mr. Bruce's question.
Let me ask you again. How do you understand the Freedom Acad-
emy will tie in with an operation such as you are carrying on ?
Mr. MoRRisox. How do I understand how it could possibly tie in ?
Mr. IcHORD. Yes.
Mr. MoRRisox. I am not advocating it be tied in, but the question was
asked. I think first you would need recruits, would you not, for the
Freedom Academy ?
Mr. IcPiORD. Under the terms of the bills, and I presume I know,
most of them have the provision that, if the Secretary of State agrees,
foreign nationals may be trained in the Academy.
Mr. Morrison. Then you would need some method of obtaining these
recruits ? I merely state that the Operation Amigo program has al-
ready built into it a source of recruits for the Freedom Academy if you
so desired.
Mr. IcHORD. Yes, from the countries in which you have been work-
ing, but I see no way in which the Freedom Academy would infringe
upon your operations except it may be that an official of your organiza-
tion may want to attend the Freedom Academy to study ways and
means of combating communism, how to detect it.
Mr. Morrison. I didn't mean to imply that it would infringe upon
our program.
Mr. IciiORD. I see no way that it would. I thought Mr. Bruce in-
ferred that in the question that he asked you.
Mr. Morrison. I didn't think that he did.
Mr. Bruce. Xo ; my inference was that if they merged their opera-
tion completely with the Freedom Academy, on the basis of his testi-
mony earlier their greatest asset was to go in and say, "We have no
connection with the Government agency," that this was the open door,
and that if they merged with it, why then it would become, in effect,
a part of a Government operation which could negate that advantage.
Mr. IcHORD. I don't see how it conflicts with his operation.
Mr. Bruce. Xo, the Operation Amigo and the Freedom Acad-
emy
Mr. JoHANSEN. But could not the Freedom Academy provide educa-
tional facilities which Operation Amigo could avail itself of?
Mr. MoRRisox. Certainly.
Mr. JoHANSEN. That would be the independent operation.
Mr. Morrison. Certainly, completely independent operation.
Mr. McXa:mara. I think from the testimony of some previous wit-
nesses who have done a great deal of work on this bill that the setup
1364 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
that might be contemplated here would be that the Operation Amigo
officials would be able to contribute quite a bit to the Academy. They
might well come up to give lectures at the Academy, explaining to
other persons in the private sector what they can do in Asia and Africa,
perhaps, based on your experiences in Latin America, and also some
of the pitfalls to avoid, as well as some of the things you found most
effective.
Mr. Pool. Mr. Morrison, earlier in your testimony also, I believe;—
I don't know whether it was your testimony or one of the other wit-
nesses, I believe it was the previous witness — in many cases the Ameri-
can colony in these Latin American countries would not get out and
mix with the people of the different countries.
Mr. Morrison. I said that.
Mr. Pool. Did you say that ?
Mr. Morrison. Yes.
Mr. Pool. And that the Academy would be helpful to these, say,
Government officials down there ? It would be helpful to train them in
knowing what they should do in the way of getting information and
mixing with the people and knowing what the score was ?
Mr. Morrison. I don't mean to imply that all our personnel are that
way, but it only takes one bad one out of a group of 100 to mix it up
for the 100. Someone mentioned Venezuela. They are overcoming
this in Venezuela in the mining companies and oil companies by having
housing complexes where they put a mining man here and a nationalist
here and an oil company man here and a nationalist here. There is
a certain trend through the private sector to overcome this, so then
why should not governmental circles overcome this too?
Mr. Pool. This Freedom Academy could be very helpful in educat-
ing the people that are going down there to take jobs ?
Mr. Morrison. I am most certain.
Before closing, I think we ought to pay tribute to those thousands
of persons who have contributed to the success of the Operation Amigo
program.
Special tribute should be paid to Mr. C. N. Shelton, general manager
of Peruvian Airlines, who has believed in the Amigo program from its
start. He was the first man to initiate special low student rates be-
tween South America and the United States. The cost item was of
tremendous importance, and under his leadership we obtained the same
cooperation through many Latin American carriers.
Mr. Pool. Any other questions ?
Again the committee thanks you for appearing.
Mr. Morrison. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Pool. Mr. Philbrick.
Mr. Johansen. Should we wait for the second bell before we begin ?
Mr. Pool. We will take a 20-minute recess.
(Whereupon, a brief recess was taken.)
Mr. Pool. The committee will come to order.
Now, Mr. Philbrick, you go ri^ht ahead.
I believe you better give us a little background. I think most people
know you, but you better put it in the record.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1365
STATEMENT OF HERBERT PHILBRICK
Mr. Philbrick. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I am here today by virtue of the fact that for 9 years I was a mem-
ber of the Communist Party in the United States serving, of course, as
an informant for the Federal Bureau of Investigation. It was through
that experience inside the Communist apparatus that I learned a few
things whicli I tliink have direct application to the measure being
considered by the committee today.
I might add that I am pleased and honored to testify before this
distinguished committee. I use the word "distinguished." Certainly
this committee has been distinguished in a number of ways. It is
obviously distinguished by the violence and the vehemence of the at-
tacks against it.
I think no other committee in the Congress has suffered as much
vehemence as this one, but I know the members consider this to be a
badge of honor, because that attack is directed by the Communist
criminal conspiracy, the international apparatus that hopes to destroy
the freedom of all free nations.
The fact that this committee should be singled out by the enemies
of America and of free men everywhere is indeed a mark of distinc-
tion and moot testimony to the effectiveness of this committee in com-
bating the Communist conspiracy.
I believe sincerely that this committee is also furthermore distin-
guished by the fact that, not only among its members on the congres-
sional level, but on the staff level as well, are some of the most astute
and knowledgeable men we have in Washington today, not only rela-
tive to knowledge of the history and scope of Soviet activity in the
United States in the past, but also relative to the tactics and strategy
and goals and programs of the Communists as of this moment.
Certainly this committee, along with its counterpart in the upper
House, the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee, has produced for
the American people more factual, accurate infonnation regarding the
Communist Party than any other single source in the United States
today.
In reviewing the very best books on the subject of commimism, it is
surprising to note in what large measure competent authors and
writers in the field have depended upon this committee for their source
of information and factual data.
Therefore, I can think of no better qualified committee in the House
of Representatives to conduct the hearings concerning the Freedom
Academy bill, H.R. 5368.
This is an extremely important measure. Its implications are far-
reaching. It opens doors into a relatively unexplored area which
many people today do not even know exists. Its impact in the struggle
against the common enemies of freedom, if enacted, will be enormous.
It is truly a revolutionary bill in that nothing else quite like the Free-
dom Academy now exists.
Indeed, the matter under consideration by this committee involves
not only the making, but quite possibly the changing, of history. I
believe that the future of the free world as we know it today may very
well depend upon the decision made by this committee and by the Con-
gress relative to the measures under discussion.
30-471— 64— pt. 2 9
1366 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
Gentlemen, we have in this country today two great bastions of
freedom, two of the greatest in the world insofar as training and
equipping dedicated men who are willing to devote their very lives to
the defense of this country. Indeed, as we meet here today, the prod-
uct of one of those training institutions is being honored and remem-
bered by men and women and, yes, even children, all over the world.
The hearts of men everywhere who love freedom and who cherish
liberty are today experiencing the sad but grateful pain of grief and
of proud memory of one man who contributed so much to whatever
measure of freedom we enjoy today.
The man, of course, of whom I speak is the late General Douglas
MacArthur, whose body will lie in the rotunda of the United States
Capitol tomorrow, scarcely more than a stone's throw from the room
in which we meet today. General MacArthur will always be held in
the memory of men and on the pages of history as an example of what
one man can do and what service he can render to his Nation and to
his God, given the proper measure of instruction, background, and
training to match his dedication.
I know that General MacArthur was always the first to give due
credit to that background and training which he received in one of the
institutions of learning I have in mind. Tliey are, needless to say.
West Point and Annapolis. General MacArthur, of course, is just one
of many graduates of those schools whose names shall be engraved for-
ever in the honor tablets and memorials which are the very building
blocks which have made this Nation the greatest and the strongest in
the world today.
Mr. JoHANSEN. May I interrupt just to keep the witness and the
committee out of trouble on the record ?
I assume the witness did not deliberately omit the Air Force
Academy.
Mr. Philbrick. No, sir, that was inadvertent.
I believe it would not be an exaggeration to say that, as one reviews
the history of our country over the years and as one recalls the great
perils and the serious threats posed against the United States of
America by the forces of despotism, one finds it very difficult to con-
ceive that this Nation would exist at all had it not been for the train-
ing institutes of West Point, Annapolis, and the Air Force Academy.
Here were men provided with the very exacting and demanding
science of military and naval warfare, and because men were provided
with that highly technical knowledge to match their dedication, we
have survived.
But today, gentlemen, we are involved in a new kind of war. It is
an undeclared war. It is an undefined war. It is a war in a com-
pletely new dimension. As yet, we don't even have an adequate name
for it. It has been called "protracted conflict." It has been called
"fourth-dimensional warfare." It is often, but completely errone-
ously, referred to as a "cold war."
I believe, as Captain Eddy Rickenbacker stated some time ago,
"There is no cold war; there is a hot war, literally as hot as the
hinges of hell itself, and we are losing it because we refuse to admit
we are in it."
It is unnecessary, of course, to remind this committee of the disas-
trous course of recent history or to recall for this committee the fact
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1367
we are losing the war. This is not a matter of opinion ; it is a matter
of record, and it is a record which this committee has already pub-
lished in comitless volumes and transcripts and reports.
The question today is not whether we are losing, but why.
One prime example we might take out of tlie many, perhaps because
it is the closest, is the island of Cuba, which has been captured and
occupied by the Communist enemy.
Now, our military might is unquestioned. We have the world's
best trained and equipped Army ; we have the world's toughest Marine
Corps ; we have the world's greatest Navy ; we have the world's most
powerful Air Force.
Despite all of this, the Communists captured Cuba with ease, not
with third-dimensional weapons, but with fourth-dimensional weap-
ons.
Senator Tom Dodd, speaking of this disastrous defeat for the forces
of freedom, had this to say :
How were the Communists able to capture a popular revolution so quickly
and so completely? Why were the Cuban people so naive about Communist
operational methods? Why were the anti-Communists so disorganized and so
inept when the showdown came? Why were they outthought, outplanned, out-
organized, and outmaneuvered by the Communists from the very beginning?
Why was the large middle class in Havana, which w^as solidly behind Castro,
unable to cope with the Communist cadres? Where were their leaders? Why
were they not better trained? To what extent was our own negligence respon-
sible for this catastrophe?
And, said Senator Tom Dodd :
Once again I ask the question : Why must the dedication and know-how so
often predominate on the Communist side? Why does it always seem to be well-
trained professionals versus disorganized amateurs?
Well, gentlemen, this is the war that we are losing. I know in
reading the Congressional Record^ which I try to read faithfully,
that the Members of Congress spend many, many hours discussing
our military problems and our military budgets. The records of these
important discussions fill many pages. Yet we could double the size
of our military forces today and still lose the war we are in, because
we are being outflanked.
This is the gap in our defenses that the Freedom Academy would
plug. Tills is the vital leak in the dyke that the Freedom Academy
would block.
I think it is important at this point that I should make it clear that
mention of our Naval and Military and Air Force Academies does not
mean that the Freedom Academy would be a "West Point in the cold
war." The bill specifically sets forth, first, that the Freedom Academy
would be established "to conduct research to develop an integrated
body of operational knowledge in the political, psychological, eco-
nomic, t^clinological, and organizational areas * * *, to educate and
tram Government personnel and private citizens * * * and * * *
foreign students * * *." It is important to stress that such education
and training would be provided not only on an undergraduate levej.
as at West Point or Annapolis or the Air Force Academy, but the Com-
mission would establish, under its supervision and control, an "ac?-
vanced'''' research, development, and training center known as the Free-
dom Academy.
1368 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
Hence, the Freedom Academy would not only provide basic train-
ing, but also intermediate training and advanced training, in the art
and the tecluiiques of so-called cold warfare.
The Freedom Academy bill furthermore sets forth that this shall be
done not only in terms of educating and training Government per-
sonnel, but also private citizens and foreign students, as well.
Now, I cannot testify as an expert insofar as the need of the bill for
Government personnel. Neither can I pretend to be an expert in the
field of international relations or on the foreigTi level. But I certainly
can testify from personal knowledge and background and experience
insofar as the need for this bill in the private sector-
This has been obvious to me from the very beginning of my expe-
riences with the Communist criminal conspiracy. I liave already testi-
fied to some extent before this committee concerning some of the things
I learned in those experiences. One of the things I have already testi-
fied to is the fact that I first became involved with the Communist
criminal conspiracy by being trapped, by being victimized, through
joining a Communist- front organization without the slightest idea
that it was a Communist front. This group was the Cambridge Youth
Council in Cambridge, Massachusetts.
I furthermore testified before this committee that not only myself
but that over 300 young people joined that one subversive Communist-
front organization. I have pointed out at some length how we were
used, how we were exploited, how we performed like puppets on a
string. We yoimg people were no more equipped or prepared to cope
with the Commmiist-trained agents than a 5-year-old boy is prepared
to fly a jet airplane.
And it was not just ourselves who were not prepared, but our teach-
ers were not prepared. They had nothing to offer. They had nowhere
to go themselves to get adequate information and knowledge concern-
ing the tecliniques and methods of communism.
Our textbooks were inadequate and did not provide the necessary
knowledge or information. Our libraries were inadequate, and we
could not tuni to them at that time to find adequate information.
There was no place that we could turn to or go for what we desperately
needed.
Well, now, this was just my first recognition of how ill-prepared our
youths were to cope with the Communist methods. As I went on
through my 9 years in the Communist Party, I saw the Communists
spin rmgs not only around young people, but adults as well.
We watched the Communists, for example, capture the political
campaign of a man who was a candidate for this very Congress. I
watched the Communists move into that candidate's campaign, take
it over, and operate it without his knowledge that it was being done.
Needless to say, he was defeated in his attempts to become a Member
of Congress.
I watched the Communists move into the Progressive Party, which
in its beginning was a legitimate political party. I watched the
Communists destroy the Progressive Party as a legitimate political
movement and I watched them destroy Vice President Henry Wallace,
as well ; it was a disaster.
In so many areas, I have seen the Communists move in, distort,
subvert, destroy, sabotage, and get away with it. The reason they
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1369
got away with it over and over again is because they were competing
with insufficient knowledge, background, and training on a part of its
victims.
Now the question is. Why? Why were the Communists able to
do this? Why are they still able to do it today in many areas of
American life?
The reason is made plain in the Freedom Academy bill itself on
page 3:
Recognizing that nonmilitary conflict makes extraordinary demands upon its
practitioners, the Communists, for several decades, have intensively trained
their leadership groups and cadres in an extensive network of basic, intermediate,
and advanced schools.
I can certainly testify to the accuracy of that section of the bill
because I myself have attended, as a student inside the Communist
Party, some of these special training schools, and, believe me, these
training schools are good. There is no question but that by applica-
tion in this field the Reds have developed advanced techniques in
fourth-dimensional warfare, for which we have not yet i:)repared suf-
ficient countermeasures.
The Connnunists are never allowed to forget the importance of
ability to wage this type of war. I am a regular reader of the World
Marxist Revieio^ which goes to good Communists all over the world,
and Political Affairs^ the theoretical organ of the Communist Party,
U.S.A. I find that never an issue goes by that the Coinnumists do not
remind their members of the importance of skill and ability in the art
of so-called cold warfare.
In July, for example, this past summer, the World Marxist Review
had this to say to their Communists around the world:
It would be wrong to say that peaceful coexistence implies that the colonial
peoples should renounce their struggle for independence or that the proletarians
in the capitalistic countries and the peoples of the socialist camp should refuse
to support that struggle. "The example of Cuba * * * speaks against this
point of view."
* >i< >i> * * * *
The Central Committee denounced those who claim that the Communists in
working for peaceful coexistence are ready to bargain with the class
enemy ♦ * *.
In August of last year, in Political Affairs^ the Communists told
their members why this was necessary. Again quoting from their
publication :
There have been no retreats by the forces of socialism ♦ * *. To put the with-
drawal of missiles from Cuba into this category is to make a defeat out of
what was actually a "victory * * * it is only world imperialism that has been re-
treating and will be compelled to retreat further and further until it is finally
driven from the world scene. * * *
So, the Communists know exactly what they intend to do.
In September of this past year, during the test ban treaty, the
Communists were told this in Wo7'ld Marxist Review :
The world revolutionary process is developing today in conditions of the
most complex interplay of different forces * * *. The nature and the content of
this process are determined by the merging into one powerful current of the
anti-imperialist struggle of the peoples building socialism and communism,
the revolutionary movement of the working class in the capitalist countries,
the national liberation movement of the oppressed peoples and the general
1370 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
democratic movement. The world revolutionary process is accompanied by a
bitter economic, political and ideological struggle against imperialism, and first
and foremost against U.S. imperialism, the bulvpark of world reaction.
Now, note that the Communists are warned that this is taking place
in "the most complex interplay of different forces." This is indeed
true. Indeed, this committee recently published an important volume,
a report on how today the Communists are giving special attention to
the interplay, the combination of parliamentary and extra-parliamen-
tary metliods in their war against the free nations.
Now, to meet this challenge on the private sector today, there is
absolutely nothing in existence. One of the groups I work with quite
closely, for exam])le, is the Ail-American Conference to Combat Com-
munism. Now, this group is composed of some 40 or more of the finest
national organizations across the United States : the Lions and the
Kiwanians and the Red Men and various veterans groups and organi-
zations, civic gi'oups. They meet together periodically to try to see
what they can do as national organizations to provide some real help
in this area of cold warfare. But we are inadequately financed; we
don't have the j^roper resources; we have to get by with volunteers and
part-time employees. It simply does not fill the bill, much as the
various groups wish to help and despite their dedication.
Well, subsection IV of section 2 of H.R. 5368 would specifically fill
that need in stating: "The private sector must understand how it can
participate in the global struggle in a sustained and systematic man-
ner." The bill further states: "There exists in the private sector a
huge reservoir of talent, ingenuity, and strength which can be de-
veloped and brought to bear in helping to solve many of our global
problems. We have hardly begun to explore the range of possibil-
ities."
Indeed, this is true, and I can see a Freedom Academy established
whereby the representatives of these various national service organiza-
tions could be provided with scholarships or with grants, could attend
Freedom Academy courses, for 3 or 4 or 5 or 6 months, during which
time they could be given at least a basic understanding and a good
grounding in the nature of the Communist enemy, the tactics and
strategy and methods of communism ; provided with very real and
helpful knowledge and information as to what they can do in tlie war
in which we are engaged.
Now, I don't mind confessing before this committee that I am one
of those Americans who believes that our United States Government,
in some areas, has become involved in matters which do not rightfully
belong within the Government province but which, in fact, should
remain in the private sector.
In this instance, however, I believe wholeheartedly and thoroughly
that this is one area wherein our Government does have a responsi-
bility, where our Govrenment can play a rightful role. Certainly it
is a proper role of Government to be concerned with the national secu-
rity and it is a proper role of Goverment to be concerned with the
national defense. It is this area in which this bill would apply itself
and would fill an extremely dangerous and critical gap in our national
defense picture today.
I want to thank the gentlemen for this opportunity to testify before
the committee.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1371
Mr. Pool. We want to thank you for appearing. It is very wonder-
ful to have a man of your background and character to be a citizen
of the United States and to appear here and give us the benefit of your
experiences.
I will ask the committee: Would you like to ask questions?
Mr, IcHORD. Yes.
Mr. Philbrick, there is one aspect of the bill that you did not coni^
ment upon and that is the provision establishing an information center.
I would like to hear what you w^ould think about this provision of
the bill.
Mr. Philbrick. Yes, sir.
As I have already indicated, at the present time, this committee as
a matter of actual fact is one of the major sources of information for
the people of the United States. Certainly, this committee knows this
from the number of requests for information coming to you constantly
and continuously ; but I am also sure you are aware this is not enough.
For example, I think it ridiculous that Herb Philbrick should have
been retained by the Department of Education for the State of New
Jersey to speak to every teachers' college in the State of New Jersey
on the subject of communism, to give the teachers in training a mere
1-hour lecture on communism. This is ridiculous. The Department
of Education in the State of New Jersey should have a known source
of liigh-caliber, well-prepared, well-thought-out infoniiation that in
turn could be used eifectively in the State of New Jersey. Right now,
they knew not where else to turn so they hired Herb Philbrick to come
up there.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Did I understand that was for 1 hour only?
Mr. Philbrick. That's all, plus a question-and-answer period. The
question-and-answer period went on for 2 or 3 hours. These young
people who were training to be teachers wanted information, but they
knew not where to turn, you see. There is a serious lack of adequate
textbooks to use in our schools and colleges right now\
Now, why that should be, I don't know, but I can testify to the fact.
Three years ago, I spoke in the State of Iowa to the State Teachers
(convention. There were 12,000 teachers there at that State Teachers
Convention; and after I had finished my talk on communism, I don't
know how many teachers came up to me to the platform and said : "Do
you know that in the entire State of Iowa we teachers do not have a
single, solitary' textbook to use in our schools to teach our children
anything about communism ?"
The teachers at that time told me that on their own, using their own
meager resources and on their ow^n time, they went out scrambling
about, picking up whatever they could bring in to their students; but
they confessed they knew it was not adequate to do the job that they
wanted to do.
So, yes, indeed, preparing a library of information would be enor-
mously valuable for schools, for colleges, as well as for other groups,
as a continuing source of information.
Mr. IciiORD. Thank you.
Mr. Pool. Mr. Johansen.
Mr. JoiiAxsEN. I am not sure whether you were here this morning
or not, Mr. Philbrick.
Mr. Philbrick. I missed most of the testimony this morning.
1372 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
Mr. JoHANSEN. The reason I mention that, I think most of the wit-
nesses have been questioned on the point and I would like your com-
ment as to the desirability or value — and I hope the answer will be
frank and not of the type that I might be seeming to invite — as to the
desirability and importance, or otherwise, of an Advisory Committee
or some type of setup in which representatives of the Congress, as well
as other related agencies of the executive branch, would be membere
who occupy an oversight role or a liaison role between the Freedom
Academy and the executive and legislative branches of the
Government.
I wonder if you would comment on that.
Mr. Philbrick. Yes.
I am familiar with section 13 of H.E. 5368 which, in its present
form, establishes an Advisory Committee. I am also aware of the
fact that, as the bill is now written, this Advisoiy Committee would
include representatives only from the Department of State; from the
Department of Defense; from the Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare; from the CIA; from the FBI; from the AID; and
from the United States Information Agency.
Mr. JoHANSEN. May I interrupt right there to say, however, in the
Schadeberg and Ashbrook and Gubser bills there is a provision for a
congressional committee to act at least in an advisory, if not an o\'er-
sight, role?
Mr. Philbrick. Yes, sir; and I believe that would be valuable — to
include such a provision. Indeed, I am not quite certain whether any
one of these bills as tliey are now written, as they are now formed,
would be quite that which this committee might want to bring before
the Congress.
I think there are many questions w^hich need to be raised and dis-
cussed. There may be some improvements that can be made in the
way the measure has been formulated and written. I do believe that
that would be one of the improvements.
Because of the fact that both the House and the Senate already have
done exploratory work, have done much of the vanguard work in
obtaining knowledge and information about the Communist activities,
I believe that representatives from the House and the Senate should
be part of the Advisory Committee,
Mr. IcHORD. Will the gentleman yield at that point?
Mr. JoHANSEN. Yes.
Mr. IcHORD. I believe the Schadeberg bill and the Ashbrook bill
and the Gubser bill omit the Advisory Committee altogether from
the executive branch, do they not ?
Mr. JoHANSEN. I think so.
Mr. Ighord. And substitute therefor a Senate-House watchdog
committee.
Mr. JoHANSEN. As I suggested this morning, it may be that the
answer would be a wedding of the two — for want of a better compari-
son, of the Hoover Commission type of setup, which represented the
two Houses and the executive branch or the public.
Mr. Philbrick. Yes. Yes; I had previously jotted down in my
notes a reminder to mention the Hoover Commission ; I had that very
much in mind. The Hoover Commission arrangement might very well
serve as a prototype for the Freedom Academy.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1373
Mr. JoiiANSEN. Now, the one concern tluit we have is how do we
develop this proo-ram under the Freedom Academy in a w^ay that it
will be an objective presentation of the facts both as to the nature of
the enemy and the methods of combating him and what it is we are
fighting for and, at the same time, obviate the objection which Secre-
tary Harriman made, and which I challenged somewhat severely and
which 1 reject at least from that source, that this would be a program
of indoctrination in an objectionable sense?
Mr. PuiLBRiCK. No. In think that all precautions should be taken,
that in no sense would the Freedom Academy be involved at all in
indoctrination in an objectional sense, but that it be strictly proscribed
and limited to providing information; that, insofar as indoctrination
is concerned, the only commonly held goal and purpose and aim of the
Freedom Academy would be to help peoples to establish freedom and
to maintain freedom.
I think that insofar as being indoctrinated, yes, we would want to
make it clear that freedom would be the aim and purpose and goal,
but beyond that it should be strictly for the purposes of information
and not for indoctrination.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Before I yield, I want to express my appreciation
of having you here and having your excellent testimony with the back-
ground that you have, sir.
Mr. PiiiLBRiCK. Thank you very much, sir.
Mr. Pool. Mr. Bruce.
Mr. Bruce. First, I would like to take this opportunity on the rec-
ord to commend Mr. Philbrick for his services to this country, for the
risks that you took for a period of 9 years, and I suspect in some de-
gree have taken even greater risks since in your efforts to speak the
truth as you know it to be.
I gathered from one of your remarks that you might have some
other suggestions that might be incorporated in this bill. Do you ?
Mr. Philbrick. No; I have no further suggestions as such except to
give emphasis to one section of the bill which is included in H.R. 5368.
In H.R. 5368, on page 17, there is included a section 11, subsection
(3), "To conduct such research, studies, and surveys as the Commis-
sion may deem necessary to carry out the purposes of this Act."
I would certainly want to emphasize that section. It must be
admitted that there is a great deal today that we need to know that
we don't know. It must be admitted that we are years behind the
Communists in developing techniques in this kind of warfare.
So I would hope that whatever measure is finally enacted, and let
us hope one will be enacted, that it would include a strong provision
for a great deal of research and study (o develop the necessary tools
and weapons and background knowledge and information we need in
the war in which we are involved. Today, we simply have not begun
to tackle this subject.
Mr. Bruce. I am still somewhat baffled as to how a Government
agency is going to establish a Freedom Academy with the design of
education, training, providing information on how to win the cold
war — and in essence I believe this is the purpose.
Mr. PfiiLBRiCK. Right.
Mr. Bruce. Some members of the committee undoubtedly wnll chal-
lenge this, pe rhaps rightly so, but I have yet to see a determination of
1374 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
policy on the part of the Government to try to win the cold war. I
mean I can't get through my head how we are going to set up a Free-
dom Academy with this goal under Government sponsorship which
negates policy. This just baffles me. I am all for it, but I don't
know how we are going to do it.
I am a minority of one almost on this, I guess, but it just completely
baffles me. I mean it seems to me that our priority is a goal of
policy and the other things fall into line.
Mr, Philbrick. Well, it may be a question of which comes first, the
hen or the egg. It may be that at least embarking upon a program —
as stated in H.R. 5368 — a program of research and development
toward "preventing Communist penetration while seeking to build
viable, free, and independent nations" — possibly just the very business
of discussing this and working on it will have its salutary effect in other
areas of the Government. I would hope so.
Mr. Bruce. I would hope so, too.
I thank you very much.
Mr. Pool. Mr. Philbrick, a while ago I think you testified that we
could double our Armed Forces and still lose the cold war, or the hot
war, I believe you described it. I agreed with you.
Also, isn't this statement also true, that if we don't do something in
this area of propaganda and political warfare that we are going to
lose the war anyhow ?
Mr. Philbrick. I am convinced of that entirely, sir; yes.
Mr. Pool. So this Congress and men here have a real responsibility
to do something and try to do the right thing; and even if we don't
come up with the right idea, at least we can make an effort to come
up with the proper vehicle and then we can change it if it does not
work out perfectly?
Mr. Philbrick. I believe so. I believe that we must enter into
this field admitting that there is a lot we don't know and confessing
that in the beginning it may not be quite what we would want in the
end. But at least some place we have to make a start. Yes, I believe
that a very grave responsibility rests with this committee and with
the Congress to at least make the initial move; to arrive at a starting
point, and then from that time on, and here again confirming your
view, that there should be a congressional watchdog committee, to-
gether with the other advisers, to make sure that the Freedom Acad-
emy does precisely what we want it to do. And that is to provide
information about the nature of the enemy, the methods and tactics
used by the enemy, and to provide the necessary countermeasures and
counterweapons, to seek not only to preserve the freedom of our
Nation but to seek in the long run to reestablish freedom in so many
areas of the world today which are enslaved.
Mr. Pool. We have a great product to sell. We have the greatest
system of government that has ever been devised. There is no reason
why we cannot do it if we work at it and come up with the right
idea.
Mr. Philbrick. I agree.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Mr. Philbrick, I would like to take advantage of
your presence here to make an observation regarding the grow-
ing impression I have and then ask you to comment on it.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1375
I noticed in the testimony, particularly of witnesses who deal with
the anti-Communists or countermeasures in Latin America, for in-
stance, I notice in the statements even of some of our officials in the
State Department and in Government, the frank acknowledgment
of the factor, the frank acknowledgment of subversion as a fact of
life in Latin America, for example, and in these other countries.
Yet, I have a feeling that there is a sort of schizophrenia — a para-
dox— and I am not referring now to the witnesses who have been
before the committee, but some of those who do acknowledge the
fact of subversion in Latin America belittle and tag as McCarthyism,
or whatever bad name they want to use, any recognition of subversion
of the domestic variety.
Now, am I wrong that there is sometimes a seeming contradiction
in that respect ? Out of your own experience is subversion at least as
a potential any less real in the United States than it is in these other
countries? I say as a potential at least?
JNIr. Philbrick. No, indeed, internal subversion is not any less
real. There is a great deal of confusion in this area, I agree, and
why some people in America should be so confused is beyond me.
I know there are those who say, "Well, communism may be a danger
in China or it may be a danger in Vietnam or it may be a danger con-
veniently a good many thousand miles away, but communism is
no danger here in the United States." Well, I simply cannot under-
stand how anyone can be that ill-informed or misinformed, particu-
larly when it should be quite obvious that, first of all, there is no such
thing, teclinically speaking, as an external danger separated from
or different from or isolated from an internal danger; it is all part
of the same package.
There is only one Communist International ; there is only one Com-
munist apparatus; there is only one Communist aim and goal and pur-
pose, and that is to ultimately destroy the United States. So, by that
token, the danger of communism internally to the people of the United
States is just as dangerous as the Communist International is to the
people of the United States.
So, from a purely technical point of view, you cannot say it is of
no danger here ; it is very grave danger and is becoming more so every
day.
Another area that we did not touch on — you spoke of this strange
schizophrenia. This is true. Congressman Bruce has already com-
mented concerning the seeming lack of goal or purpose or aim to win
the cold war. There are many contradictions today, contradictions
in our State Department.
For example, one of the texts I quote quite frequently in my lectures
on commmiism is an excellent State Department dociunent. State
Department Publication 6777. This was published in March of 1959
concerning The Communist Economic Threat. In the opening para-
graph of this document, the United States State Department says:
International communism — inspired, spearheaded, and financed by Moscow —
persists in wanting to communize the world.
By use of bluster, subversion, blackmail, brainwashing, military force, and the
threat of using such force. Communists have taken control of one-quarter of the
world's land surface and about one-half of the world's population.
1376 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
It is important for Americans to know of the new and subtle device which
the Communists are employing, in addition to their other tactics, in attempting
to achieve their goal of world domination. This new weapon is economic pene-
tration. And it can be the most dangerous of all the weapons in the Communists'
varied arsenal.
Well, in the light of this statement and in the light of much that
we are doing and not doing in the field of economic warfare, we find
some incredible contradictions.
Again, a very important part, it seems to me, of the Freedom Acad-
emy would be to come up with accurate information and study and
knowledge of the Communist use of economic warfare. Certainly
many of our leading businessmen, especially those dealing with for-
eign trade, sliould have that kind of information so that they know
what kind of a ball game they are playing in. It is a dangerous
business.
Mr. JoHANSEN. I expressed just recently some misgivings as to how
much enlightenment and factual information the Soviet Ambassador
to the United States gave the Economic Club of Detroit, where ho
spoke last month, and I have been severely criticized for raising the
question. I am not just sure how well equipped some of that audience
was to recognize what they are getting.
Mr. PiiiLBRicK. My guess is that many of our leading, foremost,
most successful businessmen in this country today are very poorly
equipped to cope with the Communist economic threat. This alone
could spell disaster for our country in the long run. This is almost
as though we were to take a nice, pipe-smoking, slippered, smoking-
jacket-robed, poker player and sit him down at a card table with a
bunch of dishonest, shrewd, conniving cardsharks. Now, he is going
to lose his shirt. By the same token, some of our businessmen today
simply do not begin to understand the criminal minds, the criminal
intent, and the criminal purpose of those Communists with whom
they are dealing.
Mr. Bruce. "Wlien we pass legislation which finances a fight against
the Communists and helps to finance their internal problem — I am
talking about the foreign aid bill, I mean both sides are aided here.
I mean I cannot just quite compreliend this.
Mr. Philbrick. This is wherein I believe the Freedom Academy
can provide a great service in developing the kind of factual infor-
mation which even Congressmen and Members of tlie Senat-e can use
to great advantage before casting their very important votes on legis-
lati^-e matters before the Congress.
Mr. Poor.. No other questions ?
Mr. IcHORD. I have one more question.
Mr. Pool. All right.
Mr. IciiORD. Well, now, the Freedom Academy is not necessarily
going to be advancing the immediate objectives of freedom in several
instances, as I understand it. Certainly, the subversion of the Com-
munists in tliis country will take a different form than the subversion
in a poor, undeveloped country, say in South America, living under
a dictatorship.
Mr. Philbrook. True.
Mr. IcHORD. Now, there vour Freedom Academy is going to be
training people how to check communism — that is the immediate ob-
jective, stop it.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1377
Mr. Philbrick. Tliat is true.
Mr. IcHORD. You are certainly going to fight it differently there
than you would here.
Mr. PiiiLBUooK. Yes, this is indeed true. This is an element of po-
litical warfare I learned in my own experience in the Comnmnist
training cadres here in the United States. We were told over and
over and over again that although we operated, as Communists, under
the general overall broad direction and control of Moscow, and al-
though all Communists throughout the world had the same objectives
in mind, that the specific tactics we would use in any given circum-
stance would depend, number 1, on the time; number 2, on the place;
and, number 3, on the circumstance.
We were to Aery carefully analyze and weigh each situation in each
area before determining the very best thing we could do to strengthen
the Soviet Union and the very best we could do ultimately to weaken
and, we hoped, ultimately destroy the United States. "The time, the
conditions, and the place." Over and over again, the Communists
pointed that out to us.
Mr. IcHORD. Tlie people of Cuba were comparing Castro with Ba-
tista, not Cuba with what we have to offer.
Mr. Philbrick. That is right; and, by the same token, in develop-
ing count ermeasures, you see, we must also in time take into considera-
tion vei"y carefully the circumstances, the background, the history
of the people, the terrain, the economy, and all the rest before we
can come up with any effective answers. In e\'ery instance we would
have to determine what measures would most effectively strengthen
the forces of freedom and weaken the forces of communism.
Mr. Bruce. If the gentleman will yield.
Isn't the first and the major step in anything like this a complete,
thorough understanding of dialectical and historical materialism?
Isn't this the right foundation ?
Mr. Philbrick. That is right.
Mr. Bruce. Before we can understand the techniques of a play in the
United States or in different countries, we must miderstand that foun-
dation first.
Mr. Philbrick. We must understand the theory first; yes.
Mr. Bruce. And then the faith.
Mr. Philbrick. And then the faith and then from that go on to
understand how the theory is actually put into practice.
Mr. Bruce. The application varies.
Mr. Philbrick. Yes.
Mr. Bruce. But the basic premise is the same.
Mr. Philbrick. Always.
Mr. Pool. Any other questions ?
We certainly thank you for appearing and answering our questions
and supplying us with the information you have.
Mr. Philbrick. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much.
Mr. Pool. Mr. Olson, director of the American Legion's National
Legislative Commission, will introduce our next witness, Dan O'Con-
nor of the American Legion.
Mr. Olson.
1378 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
STATEMENT OF CLARENCE H. OLSON
Mr. Olson. My name is Clarence H. Olson. I am director of The
American Legion's National Legislative Commission.
Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, I sat back here and listened to the
gentleman who preceded us (Mr. Philbrick) and I agree that it is most
fortmiate that we have such a man in our country who is willing and
able to participate in this great fight against the communistic con-
spiracy.
I would also like the record to show that I share with him the great
regard he has expressed for the late General MacArthur, with whom I
had the pleasure of serving in the southwest Pacific during World
War II. His passing is a great loss to our country ; he has left a mark
that I doubt will ever be equaled by another military leader.
Mr. Pool. I think the members of the committee would also like to
join you in that remark.
Mr. Olson. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Chairman, I have a brief introductory statement which I would
like to make. I regi'et that I am one of the great many in this comitry
who know very little about communism. Consequently, I am not
qualified to discuss it in any detail. I see it only on the surface as you
w^ll understand.
Before presenting our principal witness, Mr. O'Connor, I wish to
thank this committee for the courtesy shown The American Legion
by permitting its representatives to come before you today in support of
legislation proposing the creation of a Freedom Academy and the
establishment of a Freedom Commission. We favor the bills intro-
duced by Messrs. Boggs and Taft; that is, H.K. 5368 and H.R. 8320,
respectively.
Why does the American Legion believe such a Commission and
Academy are necessary ? Because it fears the encroachment of com-
munism and we believe that, for the most part, our soldiers of freedom,
active and potential, are not sufficiently knowledgeable in the area of
political warfare and all that it entails to effectively thwart the Com-
munist conspiracy. We have too many voices in the wilderness, with-
out concert or direction, that need orientation and knowledge such as
contemplated in the preambles to the bills cited earlier.
The destructive force of subversion must be met with knowledgeable,
steadfast determination equal to the requisites for successful military
operations. A Freedom Academ}^, as we see it, would be the nucleus
of a force for freedom, the fountainhead of knowledge that would in-
spire its activity. At a time when political wars destroy the will and
minds of men, it seems only logical that we have a Freedom Academy
to support this new arm of defense to serve as a corollary to our service
academies.
I am privileged, Mr. Chairman, to be associated today with the
chairman of The American Legion's National Americanism Commis-
sion, Mr. Daniel J. O'Connor, whose official address is 50 Pine Street,
New York City. Dan has an illustrious background in his chosen
profession, the law. He is presently secretary of the New York City
Department of Investigation. During the years 1954 to 1959 he was
counsel of the Bureau of Internal Security of New York City. He
received his A.B. and LL.B. from Fordham University and his LL.M.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1379
from New York Lfiw School. He is a veteran of World War II and
tlie Korean war, having served as enlisted man and an officer. I feel
sure he is qualified to testify before your committee, iS[r. Cliairman.
I am proud indeed to introduce Mr. Daniel J. O'Connor,
Mr. Pool. Thank you, Mr. Olson. We are fjliid to have you both
here.
Mr. O'Connor, we turn it over to you now.
STATEMENT OF DANIEL J. O'CONNOK
Mr. O'Connor. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee : As the distinguished
members of this committee know. The xVmerican Legion has, since its
very beginning, been cognizant of the Communist menace. In fact, the
militancy of Americanism expressed by the founders and early or-
ganizers of The American Legion drew such wrath from the advance
guard of communism in this country — the Industrial Workers of the
World — that the latter shot down, in cold blood, American Legion-
naires marching in the first Armistice Day parade in Centralia, Wash-
ington. That was in 1919, even as the young American Legion was
l)erfecting its organization at its first National Convention in Min-
neapolis, Minnesota, November 10-12, 1919.
Forty-five years ago the basic tenets of communism may have been
generally understood by a considerable portion of our population.
Today, however, the complexities of Communist plans and activities
have grown to such proportions that scarcely one in a thousand Amer-
icans have a mental grasp of Communist machinations. Of course, all
of us, through the news media of the Nation, are familiar with the
kjiown Communist successes, such as in Cuba and elsewhere. But how
to thwart communistic encroachments, before the fact, is a problem
wh ich we seem unable to solve.
While I feel certain the members of this committee recognize the
long hard-fought battle which The American Legion has waged
against communism since the Centralia massacre, there can be no
denial that there have been changes in the techniques of political and
psychological warfare. Centuries ago a question was posed to the
brilliant scholar, Francis Xavier, namely: "What doth it profit a
man if he gains the whole world and suffers the loss of his own soul?''
Might I paraphrase that question in pointing to the tremendous armed
might of our country, the greatest Nation on earth, and say, "What
doth it profit the United States of America to have the greatest
atomic power for both peace and war if the LTnited States of America
is robbed of its own soul ? "
In the past 17 years, millions have been encircled and their lives
regimented under the yoke of Moscow or Peiping because of a poison
that has been administered in slow, measured, but lethal, doses to
humankind in all part of the globe. The incontrovertible but sad
reality is that, without firing a single weapon, the masters of Com-
munist propaganda have been proliferate not only in the Far East,
but in our own hemisphere.
There is no committee of the Congress that has performed a greater
public service than the House Committee on Un-American Activities
in marshaling the various sources of information reflecting the pat-
1380 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
teni of infiltration not only in Latin America, Panama, and Cnba,
but also within the confines of our own geography. There is no task
more painstaking or more difficult than the burden shouldered by this
committee in probing the influence of communism in our own society.
Your committee and staff labor under constant threat of liquidation,
not by members of the Communist Party alone, but by Americans who
recognize the congressional power of inquiry for every subject under
the sun except the expose of the Communist conspiracy. What I
would like you to understand and appreciate is that we in The Amer-
ican Legion, who have consistently supported the creation of a Free-
dom Academy, have also supported the duly constituted committees
of the Congress whose findings and publications serve to spotlight the
uncanny aggressors for the minds of men.
In giving our wholehearted support, for the creation of the Freedom
Academy, we cannot help but emphasize that the greatest care must
be exercised that this new beacon of liberty shall never become, in
even the smallest part, a haven for anyone who professes a belief iii
our way of life and yet performs brilliantly for the proponents of world
socialism.
Lest you think for one moment that I have introduced a strange
note amid splendid testimony offered to your committee by the Honor-
able Hale Boggs, majority whip from Louisiana; Dr. Lev E. Dobri-
ansky, Georgetown University professor; and many other distin-
guished Americans, please understand that we in The American Legion
share the dismay and disappointment of many who believe the
cold war has achieved some measure of success in the LTnited States.
We have also witnessed the replacement of a program dedicated
to the men of our Armed Forces on Veterans Day 1962 with comment
and appraisal by a convicted perjurer, passing judgment on the po-
litical fortunes of a man who served as United States Senator and
Vice President of the United States. "V^Hiile the producers of the
program are not accused of having Communist sympathies, leftwing
leanings, and so forth, there can be no question about the bad taste
exercised in that decision. Why do things like this happen ? Why
was America's fighting man relegated to oblivion ?
What is there on the American scene which causes the cancellation
of a tribute to the American fighting man and substitutes instead an
attack on a war veteran who held high public office by a pei^jurer who
is given a television podium in a vain effort to restore his respect-
ability. This is only one example of the erosion of patriotism. Only
last week at a public school in East Williston, Long Island, American
boys and girls from upper middle-class families refused to salute the
flag of the ITnited States. Xo accusation is made against the faculty
of the school, but what has happened in the fabric of American educa-
tion which causes this debasement of our traditional salute to the flag
and our love for that for which it stands? Perhaps the "cross-fer-
tilization of ideas" pursued in a division of research for the private
sector of our society will, in the Freedom Academy, give some clue to
the problem.
In my experience as a lawyer who handled the security-risk inquiry
in the city of New York, I feel that I can make a personal observa-
tion on this program that terminated about 6 years ago. If it was
shocking to learn that engineers and others educated in our colleges
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1381
and universities had joined the apparatus of the Communist Party
and their activities remained undetected for years, then is it not of
paramount importance that the greatest possible security measures be
taken to insure against the possibility of the Freedom Academy itself
being infiltrated by anyone tutored by the great masters of deceit?
In Congressman Boggs' presentation, he pointed out, quite properly,
that the work of the Freedom Academy in no way preempts the work
of the FBI or the CIA. He stated that what is intended 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,''
but also remarked, "I have no preconceived notions of how this
Academy should be set up." Concededly, however, this is a most
important corollary to the passage of this legislation, namely, the
staffing of the Academy.
Willie The American Legion is deeply concerned about the compe-
tence of Americans who officially represent the United States, both
here and abroad, our support of the Freedom Academy would also
embrace the area of research for the vast sector of Americans engaged
in the war of ideas who are not on the public payroll. We believe the
many who are engaged in stemming the tide of Communist propa-
ganda which has poured into this country by the ton must be en-
couraged, enlightened, and strengthened. Finally, w^e commend the
Freedom Academy to your consideration. We believe its success will
be measured by its service to God and country in a recognition of the
basic discipline and spiritual values which have made the United
States the greatest nation on earth.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I ask that the attached American
Legion 1963 Convention Resolution, No. 178, be made a part of the
record following my statement.
Mr. Pool. That may be done.
Mr. O'Connor. In behalf of the American Legion, and myself
personally, I thank you for the opportunity given us today.
(The resolution follows:)
Forty-Fifth Annual National Convention of the American Legion, Miami
Beach, Florida, September 10-12, 1963
Resolution No. 178
Committee: Americanism.
Subject : Supports establishment of the Freedom Academy.
Whereas, The time has come to acknowledge the need of an institution to
prepare Americans to wage the kind of non-military warfare at which the
Communists excell, in that they have long been experts in using political,
psychological, economic, and technological weapons in their ambitious plan for
world conquest ; and
Whc7-eas, In the strictly military field our resources are superior and greater
to theirs, though in non-military areas they have a network of organizations
and tactics that have been active for years ; and
Whereas, It is necessary that we mobilize ourselves more effectively the
need for which is increasing every year to meet the many pronged challenge
of Soviet political warfare, and calling for more effective techniques to combat
this Soviet menace ; and
Whereas, Tlie State Department and the present administration has recog-
nized the deficiency in governmental training programs for personnel who must
deal with the Communists and formulate our policies toward them ; Now, there-
fore, be it
30-471— 64— pt. a 10
1382 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
Resolved, By The American Legion, in National Convention assembled in
Miami Beacli, Florida, September 10-12, 1963, that The American Legion sup-
port and favor legislation seeking the establishment of a government institution
to be known as The Freedom Academy, to help Americans, primarily government
employees, to develop the professional competence and experience necessary to
combat the extraordinary variety of techniques employed by the Communists
throughout the w^orld.
Mr. Pool. Questions?
Mr. IcHORD. Mr. Chairman, I have one question.
The incident, Mr. O'Connor, in East Williston, Long Island, was
not reported in the Midwest newspapers Last week, or at least I did
not catch it. Could you elaborate on what happened in East Williston ?
Mr. O'Connor. Well, in a school in East Williston, Long Island,
which I believe is called the Wheaton School, there were approxi-
mately 20 students who indicated to the headmaster or the principal of
the school that they w^ould not salute the flag of the United States.
The State commander of The American Legion jjrotested this course
of conduct and even went so far to recommend that those students
be expelled, in a television interview.
Mr. IcHORD. Are these children members of a certain religious
denomination ?
Mr. IcHORD. No; I would say they were of different religious
denominations. This is a public school, as I understand it, open to any-
one regardless of race, color, or creed. The objection to salute the flag
was not based upon religious grounds such as that, for example, you
have in the case of Jehovah's Witnesses. This was based upon a belief
that we should salute a United Nations flag.
The principal (in answering Mr. Goddard, I believe was the TV
interviewer) stated that he thought that we should not take any hasty
action on a situation such as this, but that we ought to give the students
a chance to reevaluate their conclusions and perhaps give them a
chance to see that they might be in error. He did not go as far as I
have quoted, but I think that is what he meant,
Mr. IcHORD. Was this a public high school ?
Mr. O'Connor. Yes, sir.
Mr. IcHORD. How many students were enrolled in the school ?
Mr. O'Connor. They did not indicate, but looking at the school on
the TV program I would say that it would probably have a capacity
of 500.
Mr. IcHORD. Thank you very much for your testimony.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Just SO even the most obtuse cannot have any doubts
as to what the gentleman is talking about in his very fine statement, the
reference made previously to the "convicted perjurer" is of course a
reference to Alger Hiss ; is that not correct ?
Mr. O'Connor. Yes, sir, that is correct.
Mr. Pool. Mr. Bruce.
Mr. Bruce. All I can say is I share your determination to be sure
that the faculty of the Freedom Academy be free of the background
or the indoctrination about which you expressed concern here, too. It
is one of the reservations I have pending in the final version of the
bill. I want to be sure that in our determination to do something good
and helpful that we do not create a monster that can come back upon
us. I am for the idea, but I think that the proper safeguards have to
be written in specifically and categorically so that the control is clear.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1383
Mr. O'Connor. On that score, Congressman, I would just like to
remark that I feel, and I know Mr. Olson feels with me wholeheart-
edly, thiit a concept of an Advisory Committee from both Houses of
Congress should replace an Advisory Connnittee consisting of repre-
sentatives who are under the jurisdiction of an administrative officer.
]Mr. Bruce. I concur.
Mr. O'Connor. I think it would be more responsive to the people
and to the Congress of the United States.
Mr. Pool. Mr. Schadeberg.
]Mr. Schadeberg. I have no questions.
Mr. Pool. No questions.
I want to say this, that I am a member of The American Legion and
have been since I was a veteran in World War II. I have been very
proud to be a member of it because they have always been for America,
and their patriotic programs have helped a great deal in defending
this country against communism and other ideologies that are alien to
our philosophy.
I want to thank both of you for appearing here today as the mem-
bers of a great organization.
Mr. JoHANSEN. If the gentleman will yield, before we excuse the
witnesses, as a nonmember of the American Legion for chronological
reasons — I was not a veteran — I want to express my admiration for
the organization and particularly the pride I have in the fact that
one of your past national commanders. Judge Addington Wagner,
comes from my hometown.
Mr. Pool. I was talking to one of the organizers of the American
Legion the other day, a very patriotic man from my hometown.
Mr. Olson. Thank you very much, gentlemen.
Mr. Pool, Thank you.
Mr. O'Connor. Thank you, gentlemen.
Mr. Pool. The committee will recess until 10 a.m. tomorrow when
we will have other witnesses here.
(Whereupon, at 4 p.m., Tuesday, April 7, 1964, the committee re-
cessed, to reconvene at 10 a.m., Wednesday, April 8, 1964.)
HEARINGS RELATING TO H.R. 352, H.R. 1617, H.R. 5368,
H.R. 8320, AND 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 2
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 8, 1964
United States House of Representatives,
Committee on Un-American Activities,
Washington^ B.C.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
The Committee on Un-American Activities met, pursuant to recess,
at 10:05 a.m., in Room 304, Cannon House Office Building, Wash-
ington, D.C., Hon. Edwin E. Willis (chairman) presiding.
Committee members present: Representatives Edwin E. Willis, of
Louisiana; William M. Tuck, of Virginia; Joe R. Pool, of Texas;
Richard H. Ichord, of Missouri ; August E. Johansen, of Michigan ; and
Henry C. Schadeberg of Wisconsin.
Staff members present: Francis J. McNamara, director; Alfred M.
Nittle, counsel ; and Donald T. Appell, investigator.
The Chairman. Tlie committee will come to order.
Our first witness this morning is Dr. Michael C. Conley. Doctor,
we are glad to have you.
For the record, please identify yourself and give a short resume of
your background, education, and experience, as a basis for your
qualification in making a case for or against the pending legislation.
STATEMENT OE MICHAEL C. CONLEY
Dr. Conley. Yes, sir, I would be pleased to.
I was born in 1926 in Dayton, Ohio; went to the public schools
there and to the north in Sidney, Ohio; served 2 years in the Army
from 1944 to 1946; and thereafter attended Ohio State University,
receiving all of my degrees from that university, my B.A. in 1950,
my M.A. in 1951, and my doctorate m 1960.
My inclinations during my university days were a bit exotic. I
wrote my master's thesis on Egyptian History, my dissertation for
my doctorate on Dutch Colonial Policy in the 19th Century.
I have taught for the University of Maryland's Overseas Program
for over 2 years, in Germany and France, and I have visited just
about every significant city and nation in Europe, including Berlin,
and I spent a month sojourning in Yugoslavia.
1385
1386 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
I joined the Intelligence Department of what was known, at that
time, as the United States Army's Military Police Intelligence and
Special Weapons School in Oberammergau — joined that department
in 1957 — and was concerned with strategic intelligence until 1961 — •
'57 to '61. I was responsible for extensive lectures on Russian history,
East European history and Balkan history, surveys of Soviet foreign
policy in western Central Europe and South and Southeast Asia, and
I have lectured for a number of years on Communist ideology.
In 1961, when the United States Army in Europe decided to begin a
program of counterinsurgency training in Europe, I was designated
by the commander of the United States Army School, Europe, in
Oberammergau, southern Germany, to draw up a table of organiza-
tion for a unit to teach counterinsurgency and to prepare a program of
instruction for such a unit — that coming after 3 years of experience in
the Intelligence Department, where I concerned myself broadly with
the nature of communism and the foreign policies of the Soviet Union.
I have been intimately and veiy closely attached to this general busi-
ness of counterinsurgency from the summer of 1961. Then, and I in-
deed, perhaps more than any other person in Oberammergau, was
responsible for the kind of product that came out, the course of in-
struction that we give there, and the philosophy, in which lies the
crux of what we are doing there. We from the very outset defined
counterinsurgency and insurgency in very broad terms, so as to permit
us to examine many of the nontraditional areas in which conflict is
taking place.
I also had a great deal to do with the fact that the department was
so organized that perhaps 50 to 55 percent of our personnel were not
American, but were selected from all over the world for their ability
to provide us with specialized knowledge in this or that area. I saw
to it, as an example, that we had a fluent Chinese researcher available,
an Iraqi — that was by chance, but we needed someone from the Middle
East who coidd use Arabic, in several dialects, preferably. I saw to it
that one with Russian experience in the Second World War period, a
Yugoslav, was provided, and a multiplicity of other people, including
I'urks, Iranians, and what-have-you. I wanted that department to
have the capacity to draw upon an unlimited amount of information,
irrespective of language source, with no problem of language. And I
think witli this kind of an organization behind us, it was possible for
us to develop and find out information which is, for the most part, not
well known in the United States. I would like to present in the course
of my testimony some of the information which we came up with.
This has been my impassioned concern : this general field of ir-
regular warfare for 3 years, the general field of the Communist phe-
nomenon for something like 6 years.
Does this provide you with adequate background ?
The Chairman. Yes, fine. Proceed.
Dr. CoNLEY. Shall I turn, then, to the material I have ?
The Chairman. Yes.
Dr. CoNLEY. All right, thank you.
Let me identify myself here at the outset as belonging to the most
fervent supporters of the proposed Freedom Commission and Freedom
Academy. My studies, to which I have just made reference, have led
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1387
me to believe very strongly that we have neither the know-how nor the
doctrine for the type of organization necessary to respond effectively
to the form of irregular warfare in which we are involved.
I have concerned myself, together with a research staff that w^orks
nnder me, with the nature of this phenomenon, and we are now
hesitantly, as time permits us, concerning ourselves with what kind of
things we have to do to respond effectively to the insurgent specifically,
to the cold war in general. But to put my understanding of insurgency
and counterinsurgency in its proper perspective, I would like, if I
could for just a moment, to give you my personal views on what the
cold war is.
I think I can best provide you with a precept of what I mean by
cold war if I draw a contrast between the thing we faced in Stalin's
time and the thing we face now under Krushchev. I am concerned then
with the period 1945 to 1955, let us say, or '54, as opposed to the period
from 1954 to the present.
Now, what was the situation when Stalin was in the seat of power in
the Soviet Union? He relied in the post- World War II period pri-
marily upon his international party organization and, through it, he
carried out that portion of his foreign policy which was most important
to him. He supported the activities of this international party orga-
nization, which was essentially a covert and subversive organization,
with a limited exploitation of the official machinery of the Soviet
Government. In Mr. Stalin's time, the primary areas in which the
official government of the Soviet Union expressed itself were in the
areas of traditional diplomacy and in the areas of limited trade with
the free world, at least the non-Communist bloc world.
All right, now what happens after 1954, particularly after 1956?
Mr. Krushchev has retained every trick in the book written by Lenin
and Stalin. As in Stalin's time, the party apparatus and the provoca-
tive techniques available to it still provide the Kremlin with a powerful
base from which to conduct the subversion of other countries. But
Mr. Krushchev is conducting his foreign activities much more effec-
tively than did Stalin before him, because he does not rely exclusively
upon party channels and, secondly, has adjusted his policies to take
full advantage of the situation in the world in which we are confronted
with a multiplicity of new countries with inexperienced administra-
tors, no historical traditions, and no balanced budgets.
Aside from the party apparatus, which is still operative and which
still plays the game the way it did in Stalin's time, you now have com-
ing out of the Soviet Union a stepped-up trade and aid program, a
rapid expansion of diplomatic relations with other countries around
the world, a technical assistance effort, a foreign student training pro-
gram, a grossly expanded foreign military aid support, and a cultural
offensive that ranges from everything from ballet and orchestra to
astronauts and trade union delegations.
Mr. Krushchev has exploited to the fullest every conceivable devel-
opment that can be played through the official government of his coun-
try, and thus what you have today is — as I would understand cold
war — is this : the combined, integrated, external activities of the two
channels, party and state. And this is what we are concerned with.
Cold war is what you get when you play to the maximum everything
you can get out of state channels and party channels.
1388 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
Now, I would say that cold war, if it is understood in this sense,
has two portions. Wars of national liberation, or what we call insur-
gency movements, are the ultimate produce of what comes when you
work through party channels, and "peaceful coexistence'' is what hap-
pens when you work through state channels. Cold war, then, is a com-
bination of insurgency and peaceful coexistence. Insurgency, work
through a clandestine apparatus of disciplined subversives; peaceful
coexistence, the combination of programs that proceed through the
official government of that country.
You see, then, that I have cut out from this field with which I have
directly and immediately concerned myself for the last years one half
of the total spectrum of activities. Insurgency has nothing to do with
guerrilla warfare. Guerrilla w arf are is a line on a spectrum ; insur-
gency is half of the spectrum, and the other half of the spectrum is
there to provide a cover for the subversive activities that proceed
through party channels and also, where possible, to set up possible
third countries from which insurgent activities can be more effec-
tively carried out.
Now, this is the context, then, in which I would like to examine
the subject of insurgency proper. But before I go to that point, I
would like to present yon with a chart that I prepared — unfortunately
quite hurriedly last week — to point up the relationship between this
total offensive of the Soviet Union and its bloc allies and our response
to it. May I, Mr. Chairman, give you copies of this ?
There are copies of this attached to the back of the paper you have,
sir. This should also be added. The second page which you are re-
ceiving should be placed beneath the first page. When properly
placed together^ — and I am only too ready to admit that this is an \m-
perfect training aid — you should have a diagram something like this
[indicating].
The sheet that says "Organized Religion" up in the corner should be
the second of the two sheets. It should be actually a single continuous
chart, starting with "Diplomacy" at the top, and ending with "Coordi-
nated Militant Subversion" at the bottom.
The Chairman. All right.
(See "Chart A," opposite this page.)
Dr. CoNLEY. Now, what I have done on the left-hand side is to list
as on a spectrum, in which intensity increases toward the bottom, all
of the principal areas in which the Soviet Union expresses itself in-
ternally, that is, through its formal government and through its sub-
versive apparatus. And, on the opposite side, I have listed those areas
in which American foreign policy and foreign activities respond.
Now, I think a moment's glance at this chart- points up the inadequacy
of our response. The width and the length of the arrows is determined
by objective information wdiich is available. This is no attempt to
force the facts, but to represent statistical norms.
I would like to make this point. On the Soviet side, in the activi-
ties they are involved in, from diplomacy and trade through technical
training, organized religion, mass organizations, external cadre orga-
nizations, and down to coordinated militant subversion, you will notice
that there is only a single break— that is to say, there is only one point
where the lines are not contiguous one to the next, and that is following
the politico-military bloc item. But, otherwise, the Soviet offensive,
Diplomacy
Trade
Politico
Mil Bloc
Fconoiiic Jid
Tech Tng
Cul ExclBrge
PropagEinda
Org IfeL
MafflCrg
Nan -Com
Socio
Spt Sup
External
Cadre
Orgn
Coord
Militant
Sub
Traditional Diplomacy
Diplomatic and Military Espionage
Unilateral Pronouncements
Support of Subversion
c
Traditional Diplomacy
"^ Dipl & Mil Espionage
Traditional Trade
'?-rgHi t.T pnal Trarlp
Trade Espiohage
Support of Subversion
Satellite countries & Warsaw Bloc
$ &Eauip
Mil Adv
Tng Pe
A
r
Trade Espionage
tIAlQ
SEATO
Money and Eguinment
Training of Personnel
Military Advisers
T.nana g-nfl arar\tFt
PI aOaEtr> \^
Sub A*/
Planning and Construction
Legitimate Technological Training
.•Sc
i Tech 5 Tng
P nlitical Ttidn ctrination
Training for Subversion
Cjiltural _Ex£iiange_IiQgrams_
Ideological and Political Propaganda
Penetration for purposes of Subversion
Cultural Exchange
Id eological and Political Propaganda
Ideological Propaganda
Political Propaganda
f
{^
lltical Propaganda
■JtoH Penetr
>
Creation, participation & Domihation of international mass organizations
ShamelpRs eypi 9itatipri of popular needs and desires _^
£utY£X3ive Activity
V_^ ^Itep Kan-C
Persistent contacts ft proselyting of Socialists
Exploitation socialistic inclinations West masses
Pnlitinal utilizatinn nf Voliintarv Pel Trav
Fellow Traveler as intelligence source
Fellow traveler as instrument of subversion
global system of 'national' Com Parties
Covert 'national' party Intel collection
E-ytp-ryinlly ^'^^f^-i g-|iipn'l,° pnrty /'pit/Prop
J
<
Foreign Sup of American interests
^
^
*^ In-i
Country Counter-espionage
Indigenous Psrty'R infiltration multiple in-country social strata
Demon Rtrriit ions, Rtrikea^aad _Sabjitage ^
'Terrorism _&J^ntimidat ion 'T~
.Assistance to non-Communiat insurs;ency against "external _intere"sts"
Assistance to non-Communist insurgency between ethnic groups
COK'-iiur.ist cnnt.rnlled sub insurgency ~J
^
•ASpontaneous C amE..
-}
i
Coimter insurgency
i;
A tj:ai-:o
hr
w
e
t}
cc
oi
QSjNroiqe??
OfTr'or:.,':'.':?
d
o
g
tl
tl:
tl
ti
^ a9X'i-i-.:;;jo::- s'*-
tl
w
q
t(
t(
si
C(
P
P
[
t]
c
n
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1389
from top to bottom, is an integrated phenomenon, totally opportunis-
tic, but totally integrated. Our response to it, you will see, is full of
holes. In many of the areas in which we are being challenged, we are
not responding at all, and in other areas, we are responding weakly,
imperfectly.
This chart suggests that there is a need for a response at every level.
Either we must have a program equally as good as the Soviets or we
must have a program to thwart their efforts in that particular area,
and we also need integration. We need a program that is integrated,
balanced, and total.
Now, one half of the things with which the Soviet Union is con-
cerned here, and which I attempt to represent by diagraniing, are
directly related to the question of insurgency proper. And it is in this
framework that I would like to turn, then, to the question of insurgency
itself, seeing it by my definition as one half of the total foreign activities
of the Soviet I'f'nion.
All right. Now, in Oberammergau, where Ave are concerned with
this question of insurgency, we are primarily preoccupied with two
periods in the development of an insurgent movement, which we call
respectively the clandestine and the military operational phases.
These correspond to what the special group counterinsurgency under
the President would call Phase One and Two programs in insurgency
and counterinsurgency.
Now, we would define the clandestine phase as having its beginning
at that point when organizational work begins; when the first party
cadre arrives in virgin territory and begins organizational work, the
clandestine phase of insurgency has begmi.
The ultimate mission of the clandestine phase is a power seizure
through means short of the use of military force. That is to say,
ideally, where possible, the seizure of power would come through a
coup d'etat or an election victory in which the party works behind a
front federation that actively engages in open politics.
Now, if it is not possible to seize power in this fashion, then you may
resort to what we can call protracted revolutionary warfare, or the
military operational phase of insurgency movements. If possible,
they would prefer to take over through clandestine means alone,
simply because it is cheaper and it requires less discipline; but they
have shown themselves admirably capable of resorting to protracted
techniques involving military units, and I would like to turn my atten-
tion here primarily to that second period, when the guerrilla appears.
Now, we in the West have been so impressed with the fighting ca-
pacity of the guerrilla that we have tended to overlook tlie fact that
he is only one small part of the phenomenon of insurgency, which is
a much greater story. I would like to examine what, in fact, happens
when a country like South Vietnam finds itself gradually drawn into
a period of military operational insurgency. The story starts, of
course, back in the clandestine period. Imagine, if you will, a party
organization, Communist party organization in a country — the Polit-
buro at the top supported by a central committee of executors and
supervisors, and a national organization proceeding down through
the provinces to the regions, to the districts, and to local units, between
which the agglomerate of cells are organized.
1390 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
One other body I might mention at this point would be attached
at the local or district level of the party organization, the so-called
strong-arm squads. Now, these groups may have any of a variety
of names, depending upon the country in which they are operating.
They can be called, as an example, the Vanguard of the People, the
People's Peace Corps, or any of a number of names, but their func-
tion is to provide the tacticians w^ho know how to redirect a street
demonstration until it ends up in front of the America house. In-
cluded here would be the ones who employ physical persuasion where
ideological persuasion proves not to be enough. These would be
strong-arm groups in the lower reaches of the party in the country in
question.
All right. Now, once it has been decided that the party will partici-
pate in subversive insurgency movement, the Politburo at the top of
the party organization will send mobilization orders down through its
party structure from the province to the region to the district, and the
local district party organization will receive the order, "Send 'Actives'
out into rural areas where adverse terrain exists."
Now, the "Active" will be a group of 6, 7, 10 people. These will be
highly select party members who are thoroughly experienced in one or
another form of irregular activity. There will be a man who is an
expert on political work, on ideological training, on youth groups, and
so on. This will be a small, compact group of men sent out into a rural
area. They will constitute the nucleus of a future regional force and
also, at the same time, the command stmcture for a regional force.
Once the "Active" is in the countryside, well placed, then there
will be a call on the party organization in that district of the country
to provide volunteers to work under the "Active," and at least a por-
tion of the people who will join the "Active" now will be members of
strong-arm groups and will come out of urban areas.
Gradually, under the direction of that "Active," a force of perhaps
50 men will develop out there, which will receive military training
and which wnll be capable of military action, such as raiding isolated
police posts and the like.
When that force, which we will call regional, is operational and
the party organization has decided that it is indeed time to go into
the military operational phase of their instructions, then the follow-
ing things will happen.
First off, the political base of the Politburo organization will re-
name itself "Supreme Headquarters of the Peoples' Liberation Army."
Now, this is a critical juncture. The Communist knows that he will
not be able to rouse up popular support among the population at
large if he fights in the name of communism. But if he fights as the
liberator from this, that, or the other thing, you can draw support,
so the members of the Politburo simply rename themselves "Supreme
Headquarters of the Peoples' Liberation Army"; and the party ap-
paratus below it — provincial, regional, district, local level — renames
itself "Territorial Military Organization of the Supreme Headquarters
of the Peoples' Liberation Army."
That is to say, the Communist stops calling himself a Communist
and adopts an alias. The regional forces come under the control of
the Supreme Headquarters of the Peoples' Liberation Army, which is
the Politburo, but operate functionally at the regional level with the
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1391
party organization, and the reg;ional party organization becomes the
Regional Territorial Military Organization headquarters.
Now, this does not in any way constitute a subordination of the
political leadership of the party to military leadershi}:) — not one bit.
It is simj)ly a change of name for tactical and psychological purposes.
Now at that stage, then, two things begin. The regional force, an
organization of 50, possibly 60 or 70 men — depending upon how fast
they have effected their work there^ — begins small unit action. But
concurrent with this, the "Active" starts sending organizers out to
the villages.
Now the Communist has a comprehensive doctrine, step by step, on
what you do to the village population. And, if I may, I would like
to submit to vou here this following chart.
(See "Chart B," p. 1392.)
Dr. CoNLEY. Sir, I am just beginning an examination of the precise
step-by-step procedures employed by the Communist when he has
become militarily operational in an insurgency movement to organize
village population, to mobilize them. You will see up in the upper
left-hand corner, "District Committee" of the party organization,
which is now operating under the name, "Territorial Military Or-
ganization," the TMO.
The Chairman. At this point, may I interrupt you ? As I under-
stand, you are presenting your personal views.
Dr. CoNLEY. Wliat I am presenting here now is not a personal view,
but docimaented information.
The Chairman. Yes, but there is none of the information you use
as the basis of the testimony which carries a classification ?
Dr. CoNLEY. Oh, no, sir. No. I might — indeed, sir, thank you
for this point. There are two things I should stress here : First, that
I am speaking as a private citizen
The Chairman. That is what I mean.
Dr. CoNLEY. — and secondly, that I am using exclusively unclas-
sified materials.
The Chairman. As an individual, you have presented documented
evidence, but it is your individual belief.
Dr. CoNLEY. Yes, indeed ; and it is exclusively drawn from unclas-
sified materials.
The Chairman. All right.
Dr. CoNLEY. Now associated with the District Committee, which is
the TMO here, is the regional unit of 50 or 60 persons who developed
out of the "Active" sent to the countryside in the clandestine phase,
and then you see immediately below it two organizers who are sent
out to the villages.
If I may, let me concern you with the material in the very middle of
the diagram, first off. The organizers appear in a village area, let us
say a village of 500 persons to a thousand persons or a group of hamlets
closely associated. Using persuasion, in which they are well schooled,
plus the terrorism implicit in the fact that a regional unit is not too
far off, they will organize the peasant population into w^hat I would
call functional groups, that is to say, they will organize them according
to sex, age, occupation. The peasants will be grouped together into
a mass functional organization, the women, the children, the youth.
Over each of these elements of the rural population, a secretary will
1392 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
w
CJ
«
•^
Pi
^
g
M
CM
>
tH
«
<
H
C)
1-1
P4
O
W
CO
CO
!^
O
M
6H
CO
<
w
tsq
M
M
^
B
o
M
«
s
o
c>
N
D"!
r/j
CO
d
T
1
^
IH
C )
M
w
*.
M
W
CO
M
1^:
e-i
«
l-l
<
e^
w
M
«
M
O
g
•
M
M
o 1
^^
M
o
K
__^_^
g
1^
o
«
>->
(A
M
M
^x;
"
>H
FH 1
M
w
M
M
<J
CJ
C.J)
1
:ii
CO
f-i CO
EH
is;
(« 1-4
^
^ o
CO
EH fd
-sj
y
M M
Pm
o
^ O
PM
» is.
O
1
o
w
H
H
w
O
M
f^l
«
M
^
t?
M
O
w
O
H
H
o
o
piCl
p
•■
M
CA3
00
W
H
M
Ph
Ph
m
CJ
w
i^
w
ch
<j!
w
M
o
u
M
o
F-<
CO
C/J
CO
t=>
<^
>-3
pq
M
CO
<^
w
|2i
c;
M
W
FH
r^
C-5
h-4
^
■<;
*-3
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1393
be designated, and the number of these organizations will be expanded
as the possibility arises and as the organizational work begins.
Once the peasantry has been duly organized into mass organizations,
or functional groups, the two organizers will then see to it that elec-
tions occur among the village population. Now the Communist is
very eft'ective in using the devices of Western democracies in a per-
verted form. The election phenomenon which is to take place now
in a rural area is for this purpose. The Communist would see to it
that, by voting, the rural population commits an act of symbolic and
de facto revolt, sedition, against the government of their country. By
conducting independent elections locally without the slightest refer-
ence to the formally established government of the country, they have
in fact rebelled. It is an act of sedition, and they compromise them-
selves to that extent. Now out of the elections that come, there de-
velops two bodies : a Peoples' Court, supposedly elected
The Chairmax. At this point, let me ask you this question: Thus
far, apparently, nothing has happened in the local machinery of gov-
ernment, there has been no enactment of authority through municij^al
action, state action, district action of the existing regime
Dr. CoNLEY. Yes.
The Chairman — authorizing the election? I mean, what has hap-
pened, meantime? Is somebody dissatisfied that an election is being-
called contrary to, or not in accordance with, local machineiy for con-
ducting the government? Or will you develop that later?
Dr. CoNLEY. Well, no. First, I would say this: there are many
areas of the earth's surface where there is no local machinery of gov-
ernment, or it is so ineffective that it does not have a meaningful pur-
pose in the daily life of the peasant. There are areas
The Chairman. Well, maybe that is my difficulty. Things such as
you are describing would hardly happen overnight here.
Dr. CoNLEY. In the United States, you mean. Yes.
The Chairman. It would require legislative action to conduct the
election, but you are talking about other areas.
Dr. CoNLEY. Yes, sir; that is true. My remarks are primarily
directed toward the situation in the so-called modernizing countries of
the earth.
The Chairman. I see.
Dr. CoNLEY. And then, of course, in other areas of the earth where
a government of sorts does exist at the local level, it will be the function
of the regional unit to see to it that it disappears. This itself is an
alternate. The regional unit has primarily not a military but a polit-
ical function. It provides the organizer, who is mobilizing the village
population, with the potential of terror and the fact of liquidation
where it is necessaiy ; and it is a force which, also on the side, involves
itself in small unit actions against military forces, but its essenial pur-
pose is political and not military.
The Chairman. All right.
Dr. CoNLEY. Now you develop a Peoples' Court, five- or six-man
body, on the one hand, and you develop a Peoples' Liberation Com-
mittee or Council on the other hand. Now the court will be a small
body, five or six persons, possibly; the committee, a large bod3^ will
represent supposedly the traditions of legislative as opposed to judicial
powers, and one person will be picked out as a secretary to head up the
1394 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
Peoples' Liberation Committee, representing in Western tradition an
executive authority.
Now that is the situation that is shown on the chart that I have just
provided you, the third chart I have given you there.
(See "Chart C," p. 1395.)
Dr. CoNLEY. The facade presented by the organizers, now working
in the name of the Territorial Military Organization, is that the people
now have taken their future in their own hands and are acting demo-
cratically.'' In fact, how^ever, it rapidly develops that the two orga-
nizers have seen to it that they become, respectively, the president of the
Peoples' Court and the associate justice. They also see to it that the
supervision of all future elections is a function of the Peoples' Court
and they very quickly call under their own de facto control the Village
Guard, which is theoretically attached to the secretary of the council.
That is to say, that the Peoples' Court, including the two organizers,
assumes control over election procedures and control over the armed
force locally available, with which enemies of the people are to be
executed. Now, he who controls these two powers in society is indeed
the leader of society. There is your source of executive authority
in society, he who controls these powers. Consequently, the diagram
which I have given you is not in itself the end ; it must be reorganized.
This is the facade that that Communist will use in his propaganda.
This diagram represents de facto authority and power.
Now in an attempt to represent functional channels, I put the
president of the Peoples' Court at the top of the chart. He, in fact,
calls the shots; and he is functionally, now, the man who has moved
the Territorial Military Organization into the village, to the grass-
roots level. Beneath him function two men, his associate justice and
the secretary of the PLC. The secretary of the PLC and the Libera-
tion Coimnittee
The Chairman. What is PLC?
Dr. CoNLEY. Peoples' Liberation Committee. The secretary of the
PLC and the PLC itself, the Peoples' Liberation Committee, are the
rubberstamp legislature, which is effectively controlled through tlie
president of the People's Court. The associate justice controls the
rest of the justices in the court system, plus the Village Guard. There
is the situation that actually develops in a country like, let us say,
Vietnam today. The names used have nothing to do with the function
fulfilled. The facade of direct democratic action by the people is kept,
but the fact of party control under assumed names is there.
Now, it is interesting to note, gentlemen, that this kind of organiza-
tional step requires only two men, the two organizers who are sent in,
plus the general knowledge of the population that not too far off, 5, 10
miles away, is a regional unit. And when elections are held, of course,
there will always be a provision that those members of the regional
units who came from that particular area where the election is to be
held will return home to participate in the election — carrying rifle over
shoulder, of course.
Now, imagine this kind of a department, step by step, in many dis-
tricts in the country, not in just one, with many organizers going out
to one village after the other and creating that farcical process of so-
called democratic election. If you use this technique long enough and
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1395
r^j
r
Eh
a
o s
<
OEH
W
hP
O
&H
EH
^
o
p£J
c;
n
M
—
W
r/2
g
S
Ph
o
P4
0
H
&H
W
O
FH
M
H
«
M
g
M
<^^
M
O
>H
p:^
■=^
e
n
o
m
w
CO
1
i
H
EH
t^
<
c^
M
M
O
Eh
O
CO
m
^
CO
i-S
■<
©
CO
o
CO
l-H
|:^
EH
p:^
tS]
<C
t— 1
^
3
Ph
125
o
Ph
M
CJ
li:i
n
O
K -
1— 1
W
;/j
ra CO
FH
EH
p:; w
-=«!
FH
CO
H i-q
p:!
M
■a^
Q Ph
S O
a Ph
M
o
H
o
M
<
p:;
hH
<i;
:_i
t3
1— 1
zi>
>
1
i
EH
<i;
M
B^
p=;
<^
y^'4
OT
C^
02
g
l-j
CO
^^
!^-H
O
n
o
M
EH CO
■< W
i^
g K
fil
H
TrcT r-(
hq
EH iri
O
M r3
<^ l-D
1396 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
broadly enough, you can produce out of it a new government in the
country at large, which is in open rebellion and conflict against the duly
constituted government.
Let me give you the last of my diagrams, after which I will not bother
you with additional paper here.
(See "Chart D,' J). 1397.)
Dr. CoNLEY. This last diagram which I give you attempts to repre-
sent the tragedy of what is happening in too many countries in the
world today in which insurgencies are in process. You see on this chart
three parallel echelons, all of them proceeding down from the Polit-
bureau of the party organization. In the center of the chart is the
party organization itself, which now operates under the name of the
Territorial Military Organization, as we referred to it before, and
which has available to it, where it faces severe opposition, a regional
unit, capable of terror and liquidation. This party organization does
not work in the name of the party any longer, but in the name of
"liberation."
To the left of tlie party oro;anization, you will see the Supreme Head-
quarters of the Peoples' Liberation Army — which is the Politbureau,
once again, by a different name, under which regular units develop.
As you make this process work more and more effectively, you draw
out of your regional units, where you have men with field experience,
increasing numbers of persons for the kind of training you need to
produce a more or less quasi-regular military organization.
And to the right-hand center of our diagram, you see the system of
Peoples' Liberation Committees developing, now, from the village,
which we have talked about, to tlie national level — the top, the Execu-
tive Committee of the Peoples' Liberation Front, which is controlled
by the Politbureau, but imder still another name. The election proc-
ess, as indicated here, is controlled by the TMO, through commissions
that operate at the village and higher levels. The list of names put up
by the commission is also approved by the villagers in question, since
they know that behind the commission there stands the power of the
party, and behind the power of the party stands the regional unit.
You can see, then, the very strong political content of the activities of
that unit.
Now gentlemen, I have been very brief here; I have attempted to
be as brief as I can. In the prepared statement I have brought with
me there is a bit more information on this. But I would say this about
this thing, however. This way in which to go about, step by step, ra-
tionally and by preconception, organizing the population for subver-
sive warfare — this concept was fully organizational and well known
amon,g international Communist leaders at the latest by 1939 — that is
to say, before World War II began.
The original work in the direction of developing this comprehensive
doctrine on how to give the appearance to the outside world that a
spontaneous democratic process is taking place — the original work
began about 1900 by Lenin himself. By 1939. all of the techniques
necessary to conduct this form of active war had been developed. And
during the World War II period and the immediate post -World War
II period, we see this practice, which I have briefly outlined here,
repeated time and time again. There is no meaningful difference
between what happens in my diagram here and what happened under
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1397
e^
a
o
rt
PH
i^
o
p4 H M
M EH -=4
EH&H «
t3 npq
o ^ pq
H r-d M
XOHl
HO
CO
ea
Hi
o
Ph
g
O
pq
Ph
&H
M
o
(^
CO
u
W Pc;
W -<
GH
ptife
<io
CD M
ca-EH
as
M
Hl^
K CO
PhH
t3 h^
« Ph
O
H
r-i
C8
•H
H
O
nj
flo
f5 O
•Hi-q
cs nq
> P^
•H Ph
o
bO
^H
Q)
Ph
p:5
p:;
■^ CO
n3
O -p
■H -H
MS
P4
LN
\ /
X
X
/ \
u
"^ /i
Ci 03
!-\ -P
3 -H
V
o<p;
O !3
/ \
Ph
/
o
S
£H
1 "^
-p
H^
H -H
CO •§
o B
o o
1^ o
30-471— 64— pt. 2-
-.11
1398 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM C02VIMISSI0N
Tito in Yugoslavia, what happened under Mao Tse-tung in China, what
happened in the Philippines with the Hukbalahaps, what happened
in Greece in the immediate post- World War II period. All of these
movements were conducted almost with slavish adherence to the simple
procedure that I have outlined here.
In principle, the Communist is certain how to do this. He has been
able to modify his material on the basis of practical experience. Thus,
to the techniques I have previously discussed here, you can add the
technique of the infiltrated terrorist unit, which was developed by the
Soviet Union on the basis of her World War II guerrilla experience ;
and then with this modified form, these techniques are again used in
the era of the 1950's and 1960's.
The warfare with which we are confronted today in South Vietnam
is developed essentially in accordance with these principles, and every
one of the organizational blocs indicated on the last of the four charts
I have given you can be identified in Vietnam. The whole thing is
there and functioning exactly in accordance with the procedures I
have suggested.
Thus far, I have attempted to do two things : One is to give you a
concept of a personal view of what cold war is, the combining of the
state and party channels, and secondly, more specifically, what an
insurgency movement is, subversive style. It is one half of the total
picture and it is developed and escalated according to precalculated
organizational plans, which combine terrorism with military acts and
military acts with politics and sociology.
Now how do we go about responding effectively on the total level
and on the specific level to the subversive insurgent movement? Can
we go to the various agencies of our Government and tell them that
they should step up their activity, that each of them should expand its
operations, be more original in its thinking ?
I don't think this is an answer. I think that to fill in the gaps that
appear on the chart here and respond to the political organizational
work of the insurgent in countries like South Vietnam, we need a kind
of response and an approach which is comprehensive. To tell each
agency of Government independently, "Well, do something more about
it," is in my mind an unprofessional approach to the question. I think
that to tell each agency of the Government to act independently in
its own sphere is like telling a division commander that each of _ his
battalions should work out its own independent plan for its participa-
tion in the divisional effort to take hill 201. The only conditions under
which the division commander might be tempted to relinquish control
in favor of his battalion commanders is when his forces are hopelessly
encircled and he can think of nothing but retreat.
Why doesn't the division commander surrender control to his bat-
talion commanders? Well, for several reasons: First, from the very
beginning of his professional career, he has been taught that the
effective orchestration of his operation is more than half of the battle
in itself. Now, obviously, he won't use the word "orchestration,"
but what he is thinking about is that ingenious integration of the
total resources and effectiveness of each of the multiple battalions
under him. The fact that he is able to meaningfully and artistically
integrate the roles of the representative battalions, is in itself a sub-
stantial improvement of his chances of winning, so he is an orches-
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1399
trator, but he is something else too. He is a man who can rely upon a
detailed, articulated doctrine which provides him with guidelines on
what are the best possibilities under these given circumstances. These
are doctrines, and he also has available to him men who have been
trained in discipline, who have specialized knowledge and physical
capacities. The commander, then, of the division is an orchestrator,
conscious of the capabilities of his trained specialists, who operates in
accordance with a doctrine.
Now in the context of the total cold war situation, the problem
facing the commander, namely, the President of the United States,
is decidedly more complex than that of the division commander.
But, nevertheless, I would suggest that these three factors still are
definitive: the ability to orchestrate, to use disciplined and trained
personnel, and to w^ork in accordance with doctrine.
Now in the United States, the concept of orchestrating is widely
acknowledged today. Within the various agencies of our Govern-
ment, we also have highly trained, responsible, and disciplined staffs.
They are encouraged to think somewhat narrowly in terms of the
interests of their agencies of Government, but still, they are a cadre.
What we don't have is the doctrine. Think of the range of tech-
niques— psychological, terroristic, political, military — that figure in
the organization of a village, that figure in the organization of this
comprehensive national apparatus, and think of all the gaps in the
first two diagrams I gave you, where we don't respond.
Now we have to have answers; we have to have written, black on
white answers, on what to do about the insurgents' activities at stage
one, stage two, stage three, and we have to fill in all the gaps on our
chart here. We are not responding politically to the offensive against
us. We have got to fill those gaps in with our own positive programs,
where our Christian ethics permit it, and we have got to work out
other programs that thwart the activities of the Communists where
our Christian ethics won't allow us to be dragged down into the muck
from which they operate.
We need, with respect to this specific question of insurgency and
with regard to the broad subject of the cold war in general, compre-
hensive doctrine which provides us with a basis for integration, bal-
ance, and totality in our response.
Now just to give you an example of some of the things we don't
know, let me mention some of the areas in which we can't respond to
this thing as yet.
We don't have a doctrine on how to proceed from an information
program to an organizational program. Let me say this : Not to at-
tempt to convince other peoples of the righteousness of the stands we
take, not to do that would be treachery, but to do it, and then not pro-
vide the local people with the means through which they can organi-
zationally express themselves and participate in this effort, that is to
be an amateur. We must have some way whereby we can proceed
from programs in which we convince people to programs in which
they are provided with organizational means of expressing their con-
victions.
Another thing : This is a crying necessity today that the free world
be provided with a vocabulary of terms to replace the ones the Com-
munists have fabricated for us. On the psychological level, we allow
1400 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
the Communist victory too cheaply, and this is indeed morally repre-
hensible, because we let him win by default. How strong can our
position be in the eyes of the Vietnamese citizenry when we refer to
guerrilla base areas of the Viet Cong as "liberated zones?"
We need to develop a doctrine. It must be a conscious program.
We need a vocabulary which is distributed to every newspaper, every
magazine and radio station in the United States, for their use as they
so desire. More technically, we need a doctrine on how to integrate
military and police functions. We do not have a comprehensive doc-
trine on the relative function, the representative functions of police
and military groups, as they are blended together for a response in an
insurgent situation. We need a careful reexamination of our AID
program in the light of its psychological content and we have to con-
sider the possibility of supporting it with a political aid program, not
only an economic aid program.
We need, as an example, a doctrine on how to motivate, on the
formulation of a mission, and the assignment of command responsi-
bility over paramilitary forces of a civilian part-time character, which
we don't have. We do not have a doctrine on how to handle para-
military forces, part-time civilian soldiers, in a counterinsurgency sit-
uation.
We need a doctrine on how to offset the subversive propaganda con-
tent of the Soviet Union's economic and technical training programs in
modernizing comitries which pollute the atmosphere in such countries
and make positive work difficult.
We need a doctrine on precisely how to make a system of civil-mili-
tary counterinsurgency councils at all levels of government work.
Now these are only a few of the many areas in which we need fund-
amental doctrinal statements. Now, can we farm out these questions
to the agencies of Government which come closest to the area we are
concerned with, and let them answer them? I would say no. I say
that it would be unprofessional. If you want answers to questions
like this, which are essential to fight, then you turn this whole problem
over to a Freedom Academy, and you provide that body with every
conceivable assistance possible, so that it can begin its work at the
earliest possible moment.
If you turn this kind of question over to an established agency of
Government, then they will answer the questions in terms of their
specialized knowledge and their current operational capacities. If you
turn these kinds of questions over to a Freedom Academy, they will
answer in terms of the totality of the cold war and they will turn the
question of implementation over to the President.
A^Hiile the knowledge of every agency of Government should be
available to the research and instructing staff of this organization, it
should not be subordinated to any of them. We want answers to the
totality of the threat before us today, which is real and urgent. We
need not more specialized thinking in areas that are not integrated.
Let me add just one last word here, in reference to that matter of
making the specialist's knowledge available to the Freedom Academy.
Now in much of the literature of the friends of the Freedom Com-
mission and the Freedom Academy, there are references to the neces-
sity of studying the nonmilitary aspects of this global conflict. I would
just like to add a word about this. I think I understand what the
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1401
friends of this bill mean by this, and if I might permit myself, I sug-
gest they mean this: When they talk about the nonmilitary aspects of
the conflict, they are talking about those areas and activities not tradi-
tionally considered relevant to the principal mission assigned to profes-
sional armed forces in Western countries.
Now if we can live with that definition, then I would say that the
United States Army, as an example, is very much concerned with the
nonmilitary part of the global conflict. If you think for a moment
about organization of a village — what part of that is a military effort
and what part of that is a nonmilitary effort ? And can you meaning-
fully separate these things?
I think not. And since the Army must fight at that level, it must
concern itself, then, with nonmilitary aspects of the global conflict.
The Army can't solve this problem by itself. But I would also sug-
gest that to exclude the Army from the faculty of the Freedom Acad-
emy would be to read ourselves out of the problem. If the Army can't
solve the problem by itself, then I would suggest that it is still true
that the problem is insolvable without the Army. So preoccupation
with nonmilitary aspects of the global conflict is not the same thing as
preoccupation with programs in which the Army is not involved.
Gentlemen, I don't know how successful I have been, but I hope that
I have brought to your attention some facts that may not have con-
cerned you previously about the nature of the conflict in its totality
and our response to it and, more in detail at the grassroots level,
the nature of what happens in a little village, stuck up on the hills of
tlie central Annamite areas of South Vietnam or in the back woods of
Venezuela or in the mountainous areas of eastern Colombia or in a
multitude of other countries where the same thing is being done again
with such absolute conformity to pattern that it is not really interest-
ing to investigate new cases any more. We know in such detail what
they do the first month, the second month, the third month. Wliat we
don't know is what to do about them, but these are questions and prob-
lems that are amenable to rational solution. All we have to do is pro-
vide a place and an atmosphere and a context conducive to approach-
ing the totality of the problem rather than its bits and pieces, and
that's the Freedom Academy. This would be a major breakthrough of
the most urgent necessity.
Let me read you here very briefly something that Mr,- Lenin once
wrote :
A man who is weak and vacillating on theoretical questions, who has a narrow
outlook, who makes excuses for his own slackness on the ground that the masses
are awakening spontaneously * * * who is unable to conceive a broad and
bold plan, who is incapable of inspiring even his enemies with respect for him-
self, and who is inexperienced and clumsy in his own professional art * * * such
a man is * * * a hopeless amateur.
Gentlemen, to strengthen the territorial integrity of the United
States and the free world is a moral act. To abstain from performing
this act is not to rise to a higher ethical level, in which you place a
code of morality above your personal security. Not to do this is to
surrender the battlefield to immorality by default.
Thank you.
The Chairman, Thank you. I think we might have time for a
few questions.
1402 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
I appreciate your very penetrating discussion of the cold war and
actual operations in areas, foreign areas with which you are familiar,
and that is the area I know you expected to cover.
Coming to the operation and effectiveness of the proposed Academy,
as it would apply — but first I should say that the facilities of the
Academy would be used, utilized, in the areas that you have described
in many ways, through foreign nationals who would be attending it.
But how do you visualize the usefulness of the Academy, the Com-
mission, which is the thing we have to sell to the Congress, as it
affects not these villages you are talking about — because it is incom-
prehensible to many people, unfortunately, that it could happen
here — how would you visualize the usefulness of the Academy to people
right here at home — people in labor, in management, in all segments
of our society?
Dr. CoNLET. Well, sir, I would say, first of all, it could happen
here — I profoundly believe.
Secondly, it seems to me that the essence of the form of government
we have is that the programs we conduct in the foreign policy area
be supported by a consensus of public opinion which is well over 50
percent. We must make available to the general public the knowl-
edge that would convince it of the correctness of foreign policy, and
I don't see how else we can do it. It strikes me as being perfectly
logical that you take what our psychological operations officers would
call the key communicator from the labor union, from the women's
group, from the Aquinases, and what-have-you, and make available
to him a course of instruction — a few weeks, a couple of months, it
depends— simply make the information available to him. I think
that to know is to be motivated, and it seems to me that this is pre-
cisely the technique for producing that groundswell of support behind
an aggressive foreign policy, which is the crying necessity of our pe-
riod. I consider — I say, myself — I consider absolutely indispensable
that this Academy teach the civil population of the United States,
the professional Government employee in every service, and foreign
students; to exclude any of these three groups, in my mind, would
be to misunderstand the intent of the whole program. What you
would expect from the foreign student would be different from what
you would expect from the American civilian, but both of them need to
be informed. One of them to provide that support in the population
of the United States ; the other, the know-how of what to do next. I
think there must be this. To exclude any of these tliree categories is
to misunderstand its intent.
The Chairman. Oh, we don't mean to exclude.
Dr. CoNLEY. Yes.
The Chairman. You are arguing for it ?
Dr. CoNLEY. Oh, very strongly. Yes.
The Chairman. I was referring to practical operations and useful-
ness from the point of view of internal security here, applicable now.
People expect more of this phase of the bill, I suspect, than of the
other phases of it bectuise, you must understand, foreign policy under
our Constitution is left up to the executive department, the President
and the Secretary of State, through their vast operations. But cer-
tainly, if this Academy were required to make foreign policy, I am
afraid that you just couldn't sell it.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1403
Dr. CoNLET. Yes, sir. May I add this word here ?
I would draw a very sharp distinction between doctrine and policy.
The Chairmax. Yes.
Dr. CoNLEY. Whether you attack hill 201 is policy. That group of
techniques which are most likely to produce a successful operation,
should you attack, is doctrine.
Now policy is the selection of one of a series of alternate courses of
action which are possible in any situation. Such a decision is exclu-
sively a matter of the State Department, and not of the Freedom
Academy. The Freedom Academy is to provide a comprehensive
doctrine on what are the alternatives available, what courses of action
are possible, what blendina^, what weapons systems may bo used.
Mr. Tuck. That is the third bell.
Mr. Pool. I have one question.
Quickly answer this, if you can.
You mentioned terror in the re2:ional units. Do you have hopes
that we can counteract that by some doctrine or some policy?
Dr. CoxLEY. Yes, very definitely, sir.
Mr. Pool. We don't go for that ourselves, so what would you say ?
Have you got an idea on that ?
Dr. CoNLEY. Well, very quickly, yes, I have a couple of ideas. But
secondly, it is precisely these kinds of questions — How do we counteract
this without doing simply the same things ourselves? — it is precisely
these kinds of questions on which we must have an exhaustive exami-
nation. The fact that there is no answer to that is a reason for the
Freedom Academy.
Myself, I woul(i suggest very briefly that one of the responses to it
is through the use of paramilitary forces. If you can convince the
people that you are right, organize them so that they can express
themselves, and then put them to some task, you can generate a reac-
tion against this kind of activity of a terroristic nature. I think there
are definitely alternate programs, but we need someone who will sit
down and work this out.
Mr. Pool. That is encouraging. I thank you.
Dr. CoNLEY. I most definitely think there is an answer, yes.
(Dr. Conley-s prepared statement follows:)
STATEMENT OF MICHAEL C. CONLEY
Gentlemen, to identify myself at the outset, I belong among the most fervent
supporters of the proposed Freedom Commission and Freedom Academy. My
studies in the field of Soviet history and politics and the international Communist
apparatus during the last 6 years have made increasingly apparent to me that we
have neither the know-how nor the organizational means to stop the further
encroachments of the Communist bloc, let alone initiating an offensive "rollback".
I have been strengthened in this conviction by the somewhat more specialized
studies I have conducted or directed during the past 3 years, specifically in the
field of insurgency and counterinsurgency.
In the Paramilitary Actions Department of U.S. Army School, Europe, in
Oberammergau, I have associated myself with a unique group of persons, and
together vpith them we have been able to identify in detail the manner in which
Mr. Khrushchev's "Wars of Liberation" are imloosed upon one country after
the other about the globe. To the extent that our means permit, we are now
grappling with the construction of an integrated doctrine on what we must be
realistically capable of doing in order to thwart the calculated designs which we
have identified. I should like to turn my attention to the facts we have established
regarding the insurgent, and then— in the light of my findings — take a second
look at wliy it is that the present proc(Klures followed by our Government — even
1404 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
with the improvements from the period of the Kemiedy administration — still
remain inadequate in the face of the challenge that faces us.
But first, I would like to put this matter of Communist-inspired subversive
insurgency in context by briefly giving you a personal view of the essential
features of what we call cold war. I believe we can most readily grasp the nature
of the current cold war by contrasting the foreign activities of the post- World
War II Stalin era, from 1945 to 1953, with the Khrushchev-Mao Tse-tung epoch
after 1954.
In carrying out his external policies, Stalin relied primarily upon the CPSU
and the system of so-called national Communist parties about the world, em-
braced in his international Communist apparatus. He supported the efforts of
this organization, which were essentially covert and subversive, with the tools
of diplomacy and limited international trade. For the rest, the official machinery
of his government was not significantly utilized to support the foreign policies
implemented through party channels. His approach was — in terms of the current
situation — crude, unimaginative. His stratagems were readily identifiable. His
efforts frequently counterproductive.
Now what happens after 1954, particularly after 1956? Khrushchev has
retained every trick in the Lenin-Stalin book of subversion. As in Stalin's time,
the party apparatus and the provocative techniques of international communism
still provide the Kremlin with a base from which the subversion of other countries
is commenced. But Khrushchev is conducting this program with inestimably
greater professional competence for two reasons. First, he does not make Stalin's
mistake of relying almost exclusively on party channels. Secondly, he has
realistically oriented his strategy to exploit to the fullest the distinctive situation
which has developed in the post- World War II world. He, unlike Stalin, realizes
the potentials consequent upon the appearance of a vast number of new countries
without experienced administrators, historical traditions, or balanced budgets.
Alongside the international party apparatus, he pushes a grossly expanded
public program, implemented through official government channels. Khrushchev,
much the better strategist, has combined party and state channels. And to an
unprecedented effect ! Let us look for a moment at what he has done through
the agency of the Soviet Government.
He has expanded the number of countries with which the Soviet Union has
diplomatic relations. The U.S.S.R. is now engaged in a stepped-up trade pro-
gram with non-Communist countries. It has undertaken an expansive aid pro-
gram, a farflung technical assistance effort, and a relentless cultural offensive,
ranging from ballet and orchestra to astronauts and trade union delegations.
The result? The legitimate presence of large numbers of Soviet citizens in a
majority of nations of the world has provided the subversive apparatus with
vantage points from which to undertake operations previously denied it, while
the successes of the party's activity are opening ever-new fields for penetration
via the agencies of the U.S.S.R.'s formal government facade. By integrating
party and state, Khrushchev has grossly expanded his fields of operation and the
likelihood of the success of his endeavors.
The cold war in which we today are engaged is to be understood in this frame
of reference. It is made up, broadly, of two elements : subversive insurgency
movements, handled through party channels, and "peaceful coexistence," the
program conducted through the governmental agencies of the bloc countries
and which embraces diplomacy (to include military assistance), trade, aid,
technical assistance, foreign student programs, and cultural exchanges.
If we think in terms of this conceptual framework and consider the cold war
as the sum total of the external activities conducted through the combined
resources of party and government framework, we are justified already at
the outset of our investigation in drawing certain conclusions regarding the
competence of the United States currently to respond to the challenge. Let me
turn your attention to the first of the charts which have been distributed to you.
It attempts to identify the essential multiple elements in the U.S.S.R.'s foreign
activities and contrasts them with our appropriate responses. You will notice
that the weapons systems available to Khrushchev constitute, with one excep-
tion, a continuous band of instruments for an integrated offensive. The length
of the several arrows indicates the relative strength of the respective efforts.
The American response, as is immediately apparent, is sporadic, piecemeal, and
lacks integration. The only areas in which we are producing a superior effort
are the military and economic sectors, but the lack of thoroughgoing Integra-
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1405
tion means that we must necessarily blunt the effectiveness of such major posi-
tive operations as we do conduct.
It is in this context that I would have you view what I now wish to say
about subversive insurgency. On the one hand, I claim a very important place
in the sun for the business with which I have concerned myself for some 3 years.
It's not just one of the lines on the spectrum of techniques available to the
Communist in the cold war ; it is one half of the total offensive. For this reason,
I would suggest that there is a world of difference between a subversive in-
surgent and a guerrilla. One half of all the foreign activities listed on the Soviet
side of the chart are directly relevant to insurgency, and the other half provide
such subversion with the prerequisite of a favorable international climate of
opinion and third-country bases for support, whether official or unofficial.
On the other hand, I would alert you as to the weakness of our response to
the totality of the cold war before I proceed to examine our more specific inade-
quacies with respect to subversive insurgency.
Having said this, let me now analyze some of the central elements of sub-
versive insurgency, stressing its organizational aspects. We in Oberammergau
concentrate our attention on two periods in the development of a subversive
insurgency movement which we identify, respectively, as the clandestine phase
and the military operational phase and which correspond with what Special
Group (CI) identifies as Phase One and Two. We recognize no sharp demar-
cation between these periods, teaching that subversive insurgency is a con-
sciously preconceived and directed cumulative phenomenon which intensifies
step by step. It progresses from activities below the level of detection to
operations beyond the indigenous government's capacity to control. During
both periods a multiplicity of highly sophisticated techniques and procedures
are employed
The clandestine phase commences when party members begin their first orga-
nizational work within the population of a country. At this point, there is no
blaze of battle, no guerrillas, and even street demonstrations will commence
only sometime after organizational work is well under way. The goal of this
phase is the seizure of power by means other than the resort to protracted mili-
tary force. It may consequently be successfully concluded with a coup d'etat
or an election victory carried by a front federation which is effectively under
party control. This is the pi'eferred plan since it costs the least and involves
a minimum of coordination and discipline.
But today, gentlemen, I would like to concentrate our attention on the less
understood second phase during which the guerrilla does put in his appearance.
We in the West have been impressed with the fighting ability of this chap so
long that we have not fully appreciated that he is only a small part of the effort
which unfolds in the course of revolutionary warfare during its military opera-
tional phase. Let me try to give you a feel for the bigger story.
We begin with the Communist party organization, which was developed dur-
ing the clandestine phase of activities. At its top is a Politburo of national
party iwlicymakers headed by a general secretary. This body is assisted by a
larger central committee of hard-core party members. And beneath this level,
the organization stretches out across the country through provincial, regional,
district, and local committees with their subordinated conglomerate of 3 to 20
men cells. Within these committees are the men who will take over the coun-
try's administration and government if their efforts are successful. In other
words, they constitute a shadow government. At the local level the party will
also organize specialized strong-arm squads which may be identifed for tactical
reasons with any of a number of names. They organize crowds, protest meet-
ings, and demonstrations and also deal physically with opposition.
Once it has been decided to enter into open armed confiict, the Politbureau
of the central committee will send mobilization directives through the party
organization down to district committees, instructing them to select party
members to form "Actives." An "Active" will consist of some 8 to 10 people,
highly specialized in one or more fields. They will locate in a region of adverse
terrain and begin the training of individuals, at learst partially drawn from the
strong-arm squads. The preparations in the countryside will be supported by
stepped-up mass demonstrations, riots, strikes, and violence against the police
in urban centers.
At this juncture, if the party considers the situation to be favorable, it will
take on a new nomenclature to give itself a military "look." Aware that many
people who would not fight for communism will indeed support "liberators," the
1406 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
Politburo now calls itself the Supreme Headquarters of the Peoples' Liberation
Army. The provincial and lower bodies, in turn, identify themselves as the
various levels of authority in the Territoral Military Organization. But it is
important to keep this matter clear : The change in name is no subjugation to
military leadership. The change is a tactical step calculated for psychological
and propaganda purposes.
Once the "Active" has organized a group of up to 50 effective fighters, it
undertakes two programs : it begins to attack, isolated police stations, and it
sends out organizers with the mission of mobilizing rural villagers to support
the regional units. It is to this latter phenomenon that I would turn my
attention.
For a village or collection of hamlets of 500 to a thousand persons, the party
sends two mobilizers. Relying upon persuasion and the intimidation provided
by the presence of the regional force, they will organize the rural inhabitants
into functional groups according to age, sex, occupation, or education. As they
achieve control, they expand the number of these mass organizations and see
to the appointment of secretaries for each group. The organizers will work
diligently to see to it that the various groups are constantly occupied in fulfilling
some specifically assigned mission and that every spare moment of each member
of a mass organization is completely taken up in group activities. In this fash-
ion, propaganda of the word is transformed into propaganda of the deed.
Once this activity is well underway, the organizers will arrange for local
"democratic" elections intended to establish two "popular"' bodies : a "Peoples'
Liberation Council" and a "Peoples' Court," the first body with a strength of
possibly 20 persons, the second to have around 5 or 6 members. Both bodies
are advertised as coequal, representing, respectively, legislative and judicial
functions.
Wishing to remain out of the limelight, the organizers will arrange to be
elected to the "Peoples' Court," not to the more attention-gathering "Liberation
Council" with its "Peoples' Secretary." They will occupy the oflices respectively
of president and associate justice of the Peoples' Court. They will see to it
that the secretary of the PLC is a pliable individual whom they can easily
control.
To further guarantee control, the organizers will arrange that the peasantry
do not determine which candidate will head up each of the elected bodies, but
that they leave this matter to be decided among those elected after the voting
has been finished. In this fashion, the population, organized in a series of mass
organizations, will select persons who will occupy legislative offices.
Now the conduct of these elections is the decisive, the all-critical step in the
process of building control over the peasantry in any given area. To participate
in the elections is ipso facto an act of both symbolic and de facto rebellion
against the duly constituted government of the country. While the peasantry is
politically unsophisticated and quite possibly naive as to the direction in which
they are being led by the organizers, still resistance may well be expected at
this point by the organizers, and they may call upon the assistance of the
regional units, locall.v deployed, to intimidate as needed and eliminate the
"enemies of the people" among the peasantry.
What appears superficially as a federation of three different echelons of au-
thority, becomes in fact a control apparatus of the organizers. The lasting con-
trol of these bodies and of future elections— which may be held as often as every
3 or 4 months to keep the population constanly engaged and participating, i.e.,
to make them accomplices to the crime — is assured by the ruling that a committee
of the Peoples' Court will superintend all elections.
A second power which is very quickly assumed by the court is that of de facto
control over the Village Guard, supposedly controlled by the secretary of the
PLC. The fact of village organization becomes quite unlike the fiction of
democratic determination once the organizers are provided with control of (1)
election procedures and (2) the armed element of the village population. They
now use this authority to establish a local insurgent commissariat.
Ever anxious to give the semblance of legality and uniform popular support
to each new policy as it is announced, the organizers will arrnge to have it
adopted by the PLC, a rubberstamp legislature. The recalcitrant, the maverick
is no longer a problem, and the party is not dependent upon spontaneous or
voluntary support from the peasantry, for the rural population is under com-
prehensive poli(,'e control.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1407
At this juncture, our district representative is in a position to provide both
the "regional" and the later "regular" units of the Peoples' Liberation Army
with all of the support services essential to military operations ; i.e., food,
recruits, and intelligence.
Reflecting the technique of provoking cooperation and support via compro-
mise, the village priest or teacher — a key communicator — will be co-opted into
the "Judicial" system as "Clerk of the Court," on the pretext that since he is
one of the few literate persons in the village his services are needed by "the
people." Thereafter he is quickly identified in the eyes of the peasantry with
the court ; he becomes an "accomplice" to the decisions of the Peoples' Court
and finds himself obliged to defend its policy decisions.
For all practical purposes, at this juncture the president of the Peoples Court
has become the local commander of the TMO, and the District Party Com-
mittee— which also refers to itself as an element in the TMO — has embedded
its authority at the grassroots. It did this by (1) organizing a regional guer-
rilla unit and (2) sending out mobilizers among the rural peasantry.
By continuing such political organizational work, while building larger and
more numerous regional units, the Communist Party can gradually set up a
complete new state in the state. It will contain three distinct echelons of
authority: (1) The party organizations operating as the TMO and supported
at the subprovincial level by regional forces; (2) the system of Peoples' Libera-
tion Committees building up from the village level where it is supported by
the technique of Village Guards (identified in Chart D as "Popular Units") ;
(3) Regular Army Units drawn from the regional forces, given more thorough
training and commanded by party personnel with extensive experience in ir-
regular warfare.
The technique for the building of the higher ofiices in the Peoples' Liberation
Committee system is worthy of attention. The "Peoples' Court," or TMO,
appoint a commission which in turn prepares a list of candidates, drawing upon
those local inhabitants who have proven to be the most responsive during the
preceding months. Once tlie list has been set up, a conference of the village
population is called together to vote. Since everyone knows that the commis-
sion is backed up by the TMO and that the TMO is backed up by the regional
unit, whose local members are required to be on hand for the elections, no one
will dare suggest an alternate list. The same process is then repeated at the
next highest level and so on up to the "roof" on the PLC system in the form
of a "front." This latter body will play a major role in the effort to get the
subversive insurgency legitimized by seeking diplomatic recognition from other
countries.
But we should not overlook the decisive role played by the PLC system inside
the country. The organization of the PLC's should be considered as the posi-
tive side of revolutionary warfare. While the party, with the PLA/TMO
organization, has the task to destroy the old administration, the old political,
economic, and social structure, the task of the PLC's is to build a new one.
For the accomplishment of this task, the PLC's will act in three different ways :
1. PSYCHOLOGICALLY. The PLC's must be an evident sign for all the
population that the old governmental administration will be replaced by a
new, revolutionary one. The sole presence of the PLC's on controlled and
marginal territory will have a tremendous psychological and propaganda impact
on the population.
2. POLITICALLY. The PLC's must be largely represented bodies. On all
administrative levels, from the villages up to the provinces or state level, the
members of the PLC's will be selected so as to represent multiple social, ethnical,
religious, and political groups. By bringing persons from many walks of life
together in the PLC's, the impression is created that a large part of the popula-
tion is behind the Peoples' Liberation Army and the revolutionary struggle,
not only the Communist Party. International public opinion and foreign powers
will believe the same or, even better, the national leaders of other countries
will conclude that the liberation army and the revolutionary struggle are ele-
ments in a democratic movement simply because of carefully organized, quasi-
democratic elections for the PLC's.
3. ORGANIZATIOIVALLY. In fact the PLC's are the nucleus of a future, revo-
lutionary government. And this nucleus, from the outset, will act as a de facto
government. The PLC will build up an administration, primitive of course, but
very efficient. In insurgent-controlled territory, it will take over all of the
functions and activities which fall within the competence of any normal govern-
1408 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
mental administration. It will organize and control economic production, trade,
education, medical care, traflBc, collection of money and food for the PLA. For
the execution of all these tasks, the PLC's can call upon the Village Guard,
made up of part-time PLA insurgents. Of course, the PLA will be continually
subject to strict control by the party or TMO in conducting these multitudinous
tasks.
With this brief sketch, gentlemen, I have attempted to indicate the skillful
blending of destructive and creative operations which come into play wherever
subversive insurgency reaches the Phase Two level of intensity. I think you will
agree that in this context it is quite difficult to separate the political/sociological
strains from the military/terroristic ones. For the Communist, this is no recent
innovation. Work to the end of achieving this synthesis was begun at the turn
of the century by Lenin. Essentially every step in the process was elaborated
before the beginning of World War II in Europe. And by then the kind of cadre
needed to implement these tactics bad been developed. Today that cadre has some
50 years of experience behind it !
The revolutionary wars in China, Yugoslavia, Greece, Indochina, and the Philip-
pines (i.e. Hukbalahaps) were conducted with almost slavish adherence to this
plan. But the Communist has shown himself capable of modifying this scheme
in points of detail on the basis of his World War II and immediate post-World
War II experience. The Soviet-developed infiltration and terrorist units for
operations among indifferent or hostile rural populations, which time does not
permit me to describe in detail here, are a case in point. And with such altera-
tions, the plan is now being implemented in South Vietnam — where warfare is
approaching a Phase Three level — in Venezuela and in a number of other
countries. This is indeed a concept of operations well calculated to test our
individual and national staying powers !
We are, under the present rules of the game which the Communists have im-
l>o.sed and we have accepted, extremely vulnerable to strategic attrition. Stra-
tegic attrition of not only material resources but something much more impor-
tant— strategic attrition of will.
To illustrate my point with unofficial figures provided me by my research
staff: The French during the period of 1950 to 1962 suffered 94.000 French forces
killed during peace time, fighting Communist influenced or directed insurgency.
This figure, gentlemen, is 14% of the entire civilian and military deaths suffered
by the French during the entire period of World War II. During the period
194(5 to 1956, France spent $11 billion and the U.S. $5 billion in trying to cope
with wars of national liberation. Gentlemen, the issue was not decided by mili-
tarv means as we know them in WW II . . . the lives were sacrificed and the
money was sacrificed to TOTAL WAR AS WE HAVE NEVER KNOWN IT.
Fighting insurgency is not a question of spectacular defeats or campaigns^
it is not essentially military. We teach our students that insurgency is 70%
political (as testified to by the insurgent) and only 30% military. We document
this ratio with testimony from insurgent leadership and with case histories.
The student then asks, "WHAT ARE WE DOING ABOTTT THIS 70% OF THE
THREAT?" Gentlemen, I must say that we have a difficult time telling them.
In the fall of 1961. the late President Kennedy stated to Mr. Alsop words to the
effect that what they were doing at Ft. Bragg, i.e., the Special Warfare Center,
was really great, but that what was needed in the final analysis was a political
effort. But this observation applies not alone to our Armed Forces. We teach
peoi)le how to be administrators, how to rotate crops, and even how to use
modern weapons, BUT GENTLEMEN WE COMPLETELY FALL SHORT IN
THE AREA OF TEACHING PEOPLE HOW TO FACE THEIR POLITICAL
PROBLEM— WE IGNORE THE PEOPLE WHO MAKE THE VALUE DECI-
SIONS—WE IGNORE THE POLITICAL ORGANIZERS— WE FAIL TO HELP
THESE PEOPLE FIND THEIR POLITICAL IDENTITY IN A WORLD
WHICH THEY HAD LITTLE PART IN CREATING. WE TEACH THE
DOERS BUT NOT THE ONES WHO DECIDE WHAT THE DOERS ARE
TO DO.
When you can get an adversary to commit 20, 30, or even 50 resource units,
be they dollars or men, to your one, you are in a most favorable position — you
can afford to drag the battle out indefinitely, and indeed quick victory may even
be less desirable than a long, protracted war.
How do we resolve this situation? Can we meet the threat by demanding
from each agency of Government that it step up its activity, expand its opera-
tions, be more original? No! this is no answer. This would be about as
PROVIDIISG FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1409
unprofessional as a division commander telling each of the battalions under
his command to work out its own independent plan for its participation in the
divisional effort to take possession of hill 201. The only condition under which
a division commander might be tempted to relinquish control in favor of hia
battalion commanders is when his forces are hopelessly encircled and can think
of nothing but retreat.
What keeps the division commander from allowing the success of his opera-
tion to depend upon the independent spontaneity of his several battalions? From
the very beginning of his professional career, he has been taught that the effective
orchestration of his operation is more than half of the battle. He may not use
this word to express himself, but he is talking about the same thing. However,
there are two additional factors here which not only encourage him to retain
direction over the course of eventi<, but also give him an odds-on likelihood of
being able to carry it off'. The division commander can rely on (1) a detailed,
carefully articulated doctrine which provides him with guidelines, and (2) he
knows that beneath him are men who have been trained and disciplined. The
commander, then, is an orchestrator, conscious of the capabilities of his highly
trained, specialized units, who operates in accordance with a doctrine.
Confronted with the totality of the cold war, it must be granted that the
problem of the commander, i.e., the President of the United States, is decidedly
more complex. Nevertheless, these three factors remain imperatives inherent
to the solution of the problem.
The concept of "orchestrating the offensive" is widely acknowledged today
among responsible American policymakers. Within the various agencies of
Government we also have highly trained, responsible, and disciplined staffs of
specialists. They are encouraged to think narrowly in terms of their own
agency's interests, but even so, they do provide us with a cadre.
What we do not have is a comprehensive doctrine! Think of the range of
techniques employed by the subversive insurgent in organizing a rural village
or building a national political and military organization. Think of the chart
to which I referred at the outset of my statement, which pointedly indicates
areas in which our response either falls short of the enemy's threat or is totally
missing. We must fill in those gaps, where Christian ethics indicate, with posi-
tive programs as effective as those of international communism. And to prevent
ourselves from eventually being compromised and drawn down into the quagmire
of the Communist's immorality, we must devise means of thwarting his remaining
efforts. To tight the cold war, we need a doctrine which will give us : Integra-
tion, balance, and totality.
More specifically, with respect to the inseparable political content of revolu-
tionary warfare, we must develop a doctrine which stops this snowball from
rolling and then goes on to dry it up. To indicate some of the areas in which
answers must be provided posthaste, we need to know :
1. The objective steps which can be taken to maximize our international in-
formation program by following up our efforts to convince people with steps to
provide them with organization. To have convinced others of the propriety of
our policies and the righteoiisness of our stand is no end in itself. We must make
it possible for the advocates of our cause to do something about it — and that is
possible only through organization — yet we have no policy, no operational pro-
cedures to be followed. Not to attempt to convince is treachery, but to convince
and not organize is to be an amateur.
2. A crying necessity is the provisioning of the free world with a new vocabu-
lary of terms to replace the ones which the Communists have fabricated for us
and which we use unthinkingly with heavy cost to ourselves. In the psychologi-
cal field we allow them their victories too cheaply, and this is morally reprehen-
sible because they win by our default. How strong is our position in the eyes of
the Vietnamese peasantry when we employ the Viet Cong's term "liberated
zones" in referring to their guerrilla base areas? With a free world vocabu-
lary developed, we should turn to all the media of mass communication —
newsjoapers, magazines, radio — with a petition that they employ it.
3. We need a doctrine for the integration of military and police functions.
4. We must undertake a penetrating study into the pliilo>sophy behind our
U.S. AID programs and consider the feasibility of supporting programs of eco-
nomic investment with complementary efforts to help free world policymakers
find their political identity.
5. A doctrine must be evolved on the motivation, mission, and assignment of
command responsibility for paramilitary (part-time civilian) forces during
Phase One insurgency, during Phase Two insurgency.
1410 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
6. A most painstaking study must be made of the techniques and principles
required to implement systems of civil/military couuterinsurgency councils at
all levels of government in countries threatened by Phase Two insurgency. In
this crucial area — to vphich the matter of paramilitary forces is also closely
tied — we must develop operational doctrine which pays due attention to ethnic,
geographic, and political variations from one region of the globe to another.
7. A set of opei'ational principles is also needed to liquidate the subversive
icontent of bloc economic and technical assistance programs which, together with
the system of friendship societies organized by every Soviet Embassy through
its VOKS organization, pollute the social atmosphere in modernizing countries.
8. To the end of generating an eventual Western offensive in the cold war, we
must be provided with weapons systems and doctrine with which to inhibit and
<;ollapse the system of Communist-dominated international mass organizations,
replacing them with new associations of global significance, organized around the
achievement of positive goals. We need an Internal Bank of Construction and
Rehabilitation for the masses. The subversive Afro-Asian Solidarity Union, as
an example, which is currently training insurgents, should be forced to compete
with a Western-oriented organization in seeking the allegiance of the peoples
in modernizing countries.
9. The system of civil/military couuterinsurgency councils is once again im-
portant to us in developing the intelligence collection and processing capability
of battalion-size military units confronted with insurgency situations.
10. There must be a close reexamination of the format and reasoning process
which determines the content and organization of an "Internal Defense Plan,''
the "IDP," which represents our Government's best efforts to date on a con-
ceptual plane to integrate our total resources in a third country for a response
to subversion.
11. We must develop a system of political advisers at grassroots level in
countries faced with revolutionary warfare to parallel and complement our U.S.
standard operating procedure of assigning military advisers to units which
occasionally may even be smaller than company size.
Who is to answer these questions and still many more? Shall we farm them
out to the most appropriate agencies of Government, acknowledging that in
several cases the problems raised fall outside of the recognized traditional juris-
diction of any one specific agency? No! We turn the whole problem over to
the Freedom Academy, and we provide that body with every conceivable as-
sistance so that it can begin to work at the earliest possible moment.
An established agency of Government will answer questions in the context
of its own specialized knowledge and its current operational capabilities.
The Freedom Academy will answer in terms of the totality of the cold war
and will turn over to the President the issue of implementation. But of greater
importance, the Freedom Academy's bias will be simply the desire to win.
While the knowledge of every agency of Government will be available to it,
it will be subordinated to none of them.
Regarding this matter of making the specialist's knowledge available, I would
like to add a word on the contribution to be made by the military. In the
literature of the friends of the Freedom Commission and Freedom Academy
bill, there is frequent reference to the "nonmilitary aspects of the global con-
flict." I would add a word of caution.
By "nonmilitary," I trust that the authors of the bill and its friends mean :
Areas and activities not traditionally considered relevant to the principal mis-
sions assigned professional Armed Forces in Western societies.
If this is what is intended, then, it must be asserted that the U.S. Army, as
an example, is directly engaged in the "nonmilitary part of the global struggle"
at the present day and will have to remain directly concerned. Given the nature
of the threat I .sketched previously, one simply cannot separate out military
and nonmilitary aspects for independent examination.
If we exclude traditional military concerns, we do not consequently exclude
our modern American Military Establishment. It cannot be expected to solve
the problem alone. But to exclude members of the professional Army from the
research faculty of the Freedom Academy is to read ourselves out of the
problem. If the U.S. Army is not enough by itself, then it is still true that the
problem is insolvable without the Army. If we place the emphasis on the
nonmilitary factors, then this cannot mean that we are turning away from
those aspects of the problem which concern the U.S. Army.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1411
I hope, at this juncture, that I have provided the committee with some com-
pelling reasons for favorably endorsing the passage of the Freedom Commission
and Freedom Academy bill. I have attempted to indicate the nature of our
failings with respects to both the cold war, in general, and subversive insurgency
in particular. Before us there is much work to be done. But the problem is
amenable to rational solution. We need not be advocates of what Lenin con-
temptuously identified as Khvostism, Tailism.
I would call your attention to some very important words that Lenin wrote
in his pamphlet, What is to be done:
"A man who is weak and vacillating on theoretical questions, who has a narrow
outlook, who makes excuses for his own slackness on the ground that the
masses are awakening spontaneously * * * who is unable to conceive a broad
and bold plan, who is incapable of inspiring even his enemies with respect for
himself, and who is inexi>erienced and clumsy in his own professional art * * *
such a man is * * * a hopeless amateur !"
Gentlemen, strengthening the territorial integrity of the United States and
the free world is a moral act. To abstain from or oppose the unavoidable in-
vestigation which must be undertaken, on the grounds that our national ethics
might be compromised, is no appeal to a higher code of morality which places
righteousness above personal security, rather such a stand leads to our sur-
render of the battlefield to immorality by def ault_
The Chairman. We are being called. I suppose we will be back
in about 15 minutes.
("VVliereupon at 11 :15 a.m., a short recess was taken.)
(The committee reconvened at 11 :56 a.m. Present at time of re-
convening : Representatives Willis and Pool. )
The Chairmax. The committee will come to order.
We have our colleague, Mr. Gubser, who I remember asked to be
heard at this time. We are glad to have you, Mr. Gubser. You are
an author of one of the bills.
STATEMENT OF HON. CHARLES S. GUBSER, U.S. REPRESENTATIVE
PROM CALIFORNIA
Mr. Gubser. Yes; I am an author of H.R. 1617. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman. If I may, I will read my short statement and ask that it
be included as presented in the record.
The Chairman. All right.
Mr. Gubser. I deeply appreciate the opportunity to appear before
you to testify in behalf of my bill, H.R. 1617.
There is no doubt that communism is spreading and that the terri-
tory of this planet which remains exclusively dedicated to freedom is
diminishing. Though wishful thinkers may say to themselves that
test ban treaties, wheat sales, and other apparent improvements in
East-West relations signal a permanent thaw in the cold war, a simple
look around the globe reveals otherwise. The truth is that we are
losing the cold war.
On December 18, 1963, I inserted a chart into the Congressional
Record which I had prepared with the cooperation of the Library of
Congress. The chart shows that in 1917, 10.1 percent of the world's
population lived in 8,603,000 square miles of Communist territory.
The growth and spread of communism has been gradual since that
time, until today 31.99 percent of the world's population (1,109,500,-
000 people) lives in a Communist world which includes 13,761,000
square miles. I will submit this chart for inclusion in the record at the
end of my testimony.^
1 See p. 1415.
1412 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
The world map is a seething blot of Communist-inspired trouble.
Laos is lost, casualties mount in Vietnam, Americans are thrown out
of Cambodia and Zanzibar; Cuba and Panama are festering, Vene-
zuela reels before Castro terrorists, Tanganyika wavers, so does
Kenya, and the Congo seems ready to boil again.
The Chinese are building new roads in North Korea, undoubtedly
for the purpose of moving troops southward. Japan's Ikeda moves
closer to trade with Red China, and Italian President Segni drafts
new oil contracts with Russia.
De Gaulle recognizes Red China, and Britain sells buses to Cviba.
Sukarno unleashes his guerrillas against Malaysia. Our trusted friend
Ayub of Pakistan moves closer to Red China. We retreat from our
hard-and-fast decision to sell wheat to Russia for cash only, while she
sends cash to support Castro's communism in our backyard. Even
while President Lopez Mateos of Mexico chats amiably with our
President, he works closely with Castro and prevents concerted ac-
tion against him.
Can any rational man look at the globe and say we are not losing
the cold war ?
In searching for a reason, it is easy to fall into the trap of over-
simplification. Undoubtedly there are many reasons, but certainly one
of the most significant is our failure to win the war of propaganda.
Time after time the free world has responded with militaiy action to
combat communism. But almost always the forces of subversion have
done their work so effectively that military action has come almost too
late.
Southeast Asia is the perfect example. Laos' fall to the forces of
subversion gained such a head start that the military response has
been placed at almost an impossible disadvantage. The same thing
is happening in Cambodia, Malaysia, Africa, Venezuela, and other
points in the Western Hemisphere.
It should be obvious by now that the Communist system of subver-
sion is working and that our response has been of the wrong kind and
is too late. In the battle for men's minds an initial advantage is fre-
quently decisive, particularly in backward and impoverished areas.
In view of our consistent failure to match Communist propaganda,
does it not seem wise that w^e take stock of what has produced the
success of our enemies and meet it on the ground of that success ?
When Lenin and his followers captured Russia, they established a
training system that has grown to 6,000 special schools which teach the
tactics of espionage, subversion, infiltration, agitation, and prop-
aganda.
Admittedly, this is not a proper free world tactic, nor would we
want it to become our practice. The basis of freedom is freedom of
choice, and we do not wish to impose our choice upon others. To do
so would be to defile the very essence of freedom. But to allow a vacu-
um into which Communist propaganda can move is to create an envi-
ronment where the Communist way can win without opposition. This
is not freedom of choice.
PROVIDING FOR CREATIOIST OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1413
Our State Department hastily employs the cliche of "indoctrination"
to mdict any suggestion from non-State Department sources favoring
f. propaganda effort to influence people in favor of freedom as opposed
to communism. This reaction is a carryover from the modern intel-
lectual's proper and justified respect for "academic freedom." But it
employs a basic fallacy.
Academic freedom exists in an academic environment where knowl-
edge is freely available. But in the target areas for Communist prop-
aganda, only Communist knowledge is available unless we present
the other side. It is not indoctrination when one side presents its case,
knowing full well that the other side will do likewise. To reject our
propaganda mission, then, is to promote indoctrination rather than
renounce it.
Our long and consistent record of failures to meet the Communist
propaganda offensive proves that it is time to break the diplomatic
monopoly which seems to consider any public relations or educational
program that it does not suggest and control as "indoctrination."
Psycliological warfare, public relations, propaganda, or whatever
you choose to call it, is a science and a definite technique which must
be learned through specialized instruction. Our diplomats have
failed because they have not been trained in a highly skilled tech-
nique. It is time we recognize that Communist propagandists have
filled the vacuum catised by the inactivity of freedom's proponents
and are winning the war for men's minds.
The purpose of my bill is to fill this vacuum and give our overseas
personnel the training which will enable them to recognize Communist
propaganda for what it is and resist it on the spot. By so doing I am
convinced we can avoid the inevitable military action which always
comes too late.
Mr. Chairman, there are other features of my bill which could be
discussed, for example, the provision for training foreign nationals.
But the basic argument for tliis important provision is the same. We
must recognize the fact that the Communist propagandist is succeed-
ing because he is allowed to operate in a vacuum and we must present
a counterforce which denies him his advantage.
This legislation is certainly not perfect and perhaps needs amend-
ment. Perhaps an entirely new bill needs to be written. But the basic
idea that we need a Freedom Academy is a sound recognition of the
reality that freedom is losing to slavery and there is no present indica-
tion that the trend will change.
I thank the chairman and I would be delighted to try and answer
any questions.
The Chairman. I just have one or two questions. As I recall, your
bill would provide an advisory committee or group composed of Mem-
bers of Congress, rather than composed of heads of agencies — State,
FBI, CIA, and so on.
Mr. GuBSER. That is correct, the presumption being that heads of
agencies would of course be consulted.
30-471—64-
1414 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
The Chairman. I understand that, and that unquestionably will
cause some concern to the committee. Would the answer possibly be —
you may answer now if you wish — some of both ?
Mr. GuBSER. Yes, it could possibly be, Mr. Chairman, and with all
due respect to the good intentions of many people in our departments,
the main thrust and the main effort of my bill is to inject something
new into this system which has consistently failed.
They say you can't argue with success. I think, by the same token,
you can't argue with failure, and we have failed.
The Chairman. I am glad to see that attitude on your part. If we
start with the premise that something needs to be done, it would be
unfortunate if we couldn't find ways to accommodate varying views
and approaches.
Mr. GuBSER. Of course.
The Chairman. And of course we will wrestle with that question.
Mr. Pool ?
Mr. Pool. I just want to say about the same thing that you said,
Mr. Chairman. I think, in view of the testimony we have had so
far, there is a great necessity that we do have people on the Advisory
Committee who are representative of the various departments as well
as Members of Congress. I think that they can all be helpful being
on the Committee. I have come to the conclusion we are going to
have to do something like that to have a successful and a practical
Freedom Academy.
The Chairman. Pardon me. I am not convinced either way, but
I can see trouble
Mr. Gubser. Yes.
The Chairman. — or disadvantage or perhaps embarrassment in
having Members of Congress on it. I have come to no conclusion,
but it is a question.
Mr. GuBSER. It would be a hot potato, there is no question about
that.
The Chairman. Not for the Members, but perhaps for the Con-
gress, the right to inquire, be on the sideline, but we certainly will give
that very careful consideration.
Mr. Gubser. Mr. Chairman, as I stated in the last paragraph of my
statement, undoubtedly a brandnew bill has to be written. The only
thing I hope, and I hope this with all the sincerity in my being, is
that you do report out a bill for a Freedom Academy. I don't know
what it has to be or what it should be, but I think this is the most
imperative need in the fight for freedom.
The Chairman. If we do report one out, we will solicit your views
and we are glad to know we have your aid.
Mr. Gubser. I will speak for you or against you, whichever will
help the most. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1415
(The chart submitted by Mr. Gubser follows:)
Connminist ejcpansion since 1917
Dale '
Nov. 7,1917
Nov. 26, 1924
Am?.. 3, 1940
Aug. ,■), 1040
Aug. 6, 1940
Nov. 29, 1945
Jan. 10, 194G
Sept. 15, 1946
i:>cc. 30,1947
June 9,1948
Sopt. 12, 1948
Aug. 20,1949
Sept. 21, 1949
Oct. 7, 1949
Apr. 19, 1950
Bcc. 29,1954
Dec. 2, 1961
Total...
U.S.S.R
Mongolia
Lithuania
Latvia -
Estonia -
Yugoslavia-- -.
Albania
Bulgaria-
Rumania -
Czechoslovakia-.-;
Korea (Deiiiocratic People's Re-
public).
Hungary
China (People's Republic)
Germany (Democratic Republic)...
Poland
Vietnam (Democratic Republic)....
Cuba -
At time oi communi-
zation 2
Population '
7 182,182,000
647,000
s 2, 879, 000
i" 1, 950, 000
11 1,126,000
15, 600, 000
1,125,000
6, 993. 000
16, 530, 000
12, 339, 000
9, 291, 000
9,247,000
463, 493, 000
17,688,000
24, 977, 000
16, 632, 000
6, 933, 000
Percent of
world
total »
10.1
.03
.12
.10
.05
.64
.04
.30
.70
.50
.37
.36
18.47
.70
l.CO
.60
.22
Mid-1963
(
Percent of
Population
world
total
224, 700, 000
7.1
1,000,000
.03
(•)
(')
(')
(»)
(')
(»)
19,000,000
.60
1,800,000
.06
8, 100, 000
.25
18,900,000
.60
14, 000, fJOO
.44
8, 900, 000
.30
10,100,000
.31
730, 800, 000
23.00
17, 200, 000
.64
30, 800, 000
1.00
17, OOO, 000
.63
7,200,000
.23
1,109,500,000
34.99
Area in
square
miles
(1963)'
8, fK)3. 000
614,000
(')
(')
C)
99, COO
11,000
43,000
92,900
49,000
48,000
36, 000
3,897,000
<2,000
120, 000
63, (XX)
44,000
12 13,761,000
I Dale given is that on which the country declared itself a People's Republic, was incorporated into the U.S.S.R.
(Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania) or, as in the case of Cuba, when Castro announced he would lead Cuba "to a people's
democracy." East Germany excludes Berlin in all colurmis.
» Because It is extremely difTicult to obtain reliable demographic data for the years prior to 1955, most of the popu-
lation statistics has been synthesized from the foUovviug sources: "Statesman's Yearbook," 1917, 1940, 1941; "U.N.
Demographic Yearbook," 1955, 7th issue, table 3, pp. 117-127; "U.N. Demographic Yearbook," 1962, 14th issue,
"World Summary." p. 124.
3 In most cases the population given is quite close to the date of communization. In certain cases, however, the
data available was several years distant from the date of communization.
* The availability of world total population upon which the percentages nuist be based is even more difficult to obtain
The following world figure^ taken from U.N. sources were used: 1920, 1, 811,000,000; 1930, 2,015,000,000; 194C, 2,249,000,-
000; 1945, 2,423,000,000; 1950, 2,609,000,000; 1955, 2,750,000,000; 1960, 3,008,000,000; 1961, 3,069,000,000.
'"World Population, 1963," Population Bulletin, vol. XIX, No. 6, October 1963. (Percentage tor 1963 based on
world total of 3,180.000,000 persons.)
« Total world area, excluding Antarctica: 52,409,000 square miles. Coiniuunist nations constitute 26.25 percent of
this figure.
' 1915.
' 1939.
' Prcsentlv included in all U.S.S.R. statistics.
i» 1935.
II 1934.
" 26.25 percent.
The Chairman. The committee will stand in recess until 2 o'clock.
(Whereupon, at 12:07 p.m., Wednesday, April 8, 1964, the com-
mittee recessed to reconvene at 2 p.m. the same day.)
AFTERNOON SESSION— WEDNESDAY, APRIL 8, 1964
(The committee reconvened at 2:10 p.m., Hon. Joe R. Pool pre-
siding.)
(Committee members present: Representatives Pool and Ichord.)
Mr. Pool. The meeting is called to order, and I believe the witness
we had, Mr. Walter Joyce, has been delayed, I suppose on account of
bad weather. Due to the fact that there are no other witnesses, the
meeting will be recessed, subject to call of the Chair.
(Whereupon, at 2:16 p.m., Wednesday, April 8, 1964, the committee
recessed, subject to the call of the Chair.)
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 2
TUESDAY, MAY 19, 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 recess,
at 10:15 a.m. in the Caucus room, Camion House Office Building,
Washington, D.C, Hon. Edwin E. Willis (chairman) presiding.
Committee members present: Representatives Edvrin E. Willis, of
Louisiana; Joe R. Pool, of Texas; Richard H. Ichord, of Missouri;
August E. Johansen, of Michigan; and Plenry C. Schadeberg, of
Wisconsin.
Staff members present: Francis J. McNamara, director; Frank S.
Tavenner, general counsel; Alfred M, Nittle and William Hitz,
counsel.
The Chairman. The committee will please come to order. Today
the Committee on Un-American Activities resumes hearings begun on
February 18 of this year on eight bills which have been referred to it,
which would create a Freedom Commission and Freedom Academy.
STATEMENT OF HON. DANTE B. FASCELL, U.S. REPRESENTATIVE
FROM FLORIDA
The Chairman. At this point, I insert in the record the statement
of our colleague, Congressman Dante B. Fascell, of Florida, in sup-
port of the legislation.
(Congressman Fascell's statement follows :)
STATEMENT OF HON. DANTE B. FASCELL, U.S. REPRESENTATIVE
FROM FLORIDA
Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee :
Ever since 1959 we have been trying to establish the Freedom Academy.
Nearly a dozen bills have been debated over that span of time, but none
has ever passed both Houses in the same session. Now we have another chance
to adopt this legislation.
1417
1418 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
As chairman of the Subcommittee on International Organizations and Move-
ments and as onetime sponsor of a bill to establish a University of the Ameri-
cas, I have been greatly concerned with vrhat one writer has labeled "the
propaganda gap." In the relentless struggle which goes on with the Com-
munist world behind the facade of peaceful coexistence, the United States has
held its own in the military and economic spheres. Our deterrent nuclear power
has prevented a major Communist thrust in the West, and our economic as-
sistance not only has been instrumental in restoring Europe to booming economic
health, but also in launching and sustaining the economic advance of many of
the world's underdeveloped nations — some of them a good deal less than friendly.
But in the nonmilitary and noneconomic spheres, the realm of ideas, some-
thing is lacliing. The American message doesn't get across with the kind of
hard-hitting impact it ought to have. All too often we get caught off guard by
unexpected developments on the world scene and appear to flounder. All too
often we permit the Communists to convert some meaningless catch phrase, like
"general and complete disarmament," into the kind of propaganda weapon that
achieves a bloodless victory.
In a way it is not surprising that the United States should have considerable
difficulty in these nonmilitary confrontations with the Communist bloc, for our
Communist antagonists have made a science of revolutionary strategy and tactics
for over 40 years. The Soviet Government alone devotes something like $5 bil-
lion a year — that's 5 billion — to operate approximately 6,000 schools which train
members of the Russian Communist Party, as well as Communist activists from
around the world, in the techniques of infiltration, subversion, sabotage, agita-
tion, and propaganda. When these agents return to their home countries, or in
the case of Soviet nationals when they are sent abroad, they are fully trained and
prei>ared to exploit any opening for revolutionary activity. These opportunities
are plentiful, particularly in the underdeveloped areas of the world, where the
people are new to self-government, where the leadership class is often ill-trained,
and where economic conditions are frequently chaotic.
But the United States, and indeed the entire free world, has no similar appa-
ratus. We have no central agency for the coordination of anti-Communist
strategy and tactics. We have no facility where our Government officials and
private citizens and their counterparts from other non-Communist countries can
receive a thorough exposure to the types of nonmilitary techniques — to the
political and economic methods which can be used to counter the Soviet and
the Red Chinese campaign to undermine both the free nations and the uncom-
mitted world. And make no mistake about it. The Soviet Union and Communist
China may be seriously, even bitterly, divided at this time, but their basic
hostility to free institutions is implacable. We must better equip the United
States, and indeed the entire free world, to cope with, and successfully counter,
the cut and thrust of the world Communist movement in the field of political and
psychological warfare.
A thoroughgoing analysis of Communist techniques can be made from open
sources. Furthermore pro- Americans in any country run the risk of being called
"Yankee stooges" especially by those whose first allegiance is to communism.
We should not let that deter us at all. As for the publication of materials by
the Freedom Commission, I notice that this is not a feature of H.R. 8320, nor of
some of the other bills under consideration.
In espousing the Freedom Academy, I do not mean to suggest for a moment
that we should in any way curtail the public and private exchanges under which
more than 50,000 foreign students enroll annually at American universities. In
the main these exchanges have been most valuable in presenting a true picture of
America. By putting freedom on display, by affording these students the oppor-
tunity to see how Americans live, to hear how Americans debate, to comprehend
what Americans value, we unquestionably deepen their understanding of us and
their attachment to free institutions. Nor do I suggest that we should not take
any other action to upgrade the knowledge and education of our State Depart-
ment personnel.
But the question remains — Is this enough? Are all our activities in the field
of psychological persuasion enough? Certainly those efforts can go for naught
if they are not coupled with a tightly formulated and broadly coordinated cold
war strategy. Our friends abroad need more than assurances of American
sympathy and support when they are faced by trained agents of Communist
revolution. They need to know how these agents think, what tactics they will
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1419
employ, and how to exploit the vulnerabilities which our opponents possess as
well as ourselves.
This is supremely important, for if we are ever to win through in the relentless
struggle with world communism — win through in the nonmilitary sphere — we
and our followers must be able not only to meet and defeat the psychological
offensives of communism, but we must be able to put forward and implement
positive democratic proposals of our own.
STATEMENT OF JOHN RICHARDSON, JR.
The Chairman. The statement of the president of the Free Europe
Committee, Inc., Mr. John Richardson, Jr., favoring this proposal,
will also be incorporated in the record at this point.
(Mr. Richardson's statement follows :)
STATEMENT OF JOHN RICHARDSON, JR.
Freedom Academy Bill— H.R. 5368 ; H.R. 8320
For the past 3 years I have been president and a member of the board of direc-
tors of the Free Europe Committee, Inc., a private organization which engages
in commimications activities designed to promote the cause of individual freedom
and national self-determination. The primary focus of our efforts is on the
Communist-ruled countries of East-Central Europe. The committee's most im-
portant instrument is Radio Free Europe.
Prior to assuming my present responsibility and following active service in
Europe in World War II as a junior oflBcer in the Parachute Artillery, I prac-
ticed law in New York with the firm of Sullivan & Cromwell and thereafter en-
tered the field of investment banking, becoming a general partner in the firm of
Paine, Webber, Jackson & Curtis in New York. For many years I have had an
active interest in world affairs, and especially in the problems of the cold war.
My experience prior to coming to the Free Europe Committee included five trips
to East Europe in connection with a medical relief program in Poland which I
organized. I am also a former president and director of the International Rescue
Committee (a private organization which provides resettlement and other as-
sistance to political refugees), a director of the Foreign Policy Association, a
director of Freedom House, and a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.
The following are my individual views with respect to the Freedom Academy
bill ; they do not necessarily represent the views of the Free Europe Committee
or of its board of directors :
This legislation promises a major increase in the effectiveness of our efforts
to build a more peaceful world.
Its most important result would be the development of a body of knowledge,
expertise, and doctrine in the fields of political persuasion and political develop-
ment abroad. It is a tragedy that no such body of knowledge, expertise, and
doctrine exists today anwhere in the free world. The failure so far to organize
the necessary research and the dissemination of the fruits thereof are in my
opinion at the root of most of our failures in planning and carrying out foreign
operations, including enormous waste of human and material resources.
The graduates of the Freedom Academy, as envisaged in this legislation, could
be expected at the very minimum to increase rapidly and significantly the eflB-
ciency and effectiveness of the foreign operations of existing governmental and
private instrumentalities. They would be trained not only in a knowledge of
historical and existing conditions abroad, as at present, but also in the knowledge
of how the processes of political change abroad can be influenced by a free coun-
try utilizing honorable means. No such training is available today. And yet
peace can be secured ultimately only through the responsible actions of respon-
sible governments in many areas of the world where they do not now exist.
The arguments that such matters cannot be usefully researched, studied, and
taught are reminiscent of the attitude many businessmen once had toward the
first business schools in this country. Their attitude is different today.
I am convinced that passage of the Freedom Academy legislation is the most
important step that can be taken to increase the capacity of the United States
to influence events abroad. Both freedom and peace may well depend on that
capacity.
1420 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
RESOLUTION OF RESERVE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION OF THE
UNITED STATES
The Chairman. We will also incorporate in the record the resolu-
tion of the Resem^e Officers Association of the United States, also in
support of these bills.
(The resolution follows :)
RESOLUTION OF RESERVE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION OF THE
UNITED STATES
The Freedom Commission Act
Whereas, Reserve OflBcers Association of the United States recognizes that
the Communist nations are waging a total political war against the United
States of America and against the peoples and the governments of all other
nations of the free world ; and
Whereas, Communist conspirators are invariably more dedicated, better
trained and have more operational "know-how" than their opponents, and
taking full advantage of this, have influenced a series of political warfare de-
feats on the free world, the total sum of which amounts to new disaster for the
United States and other countries of the free world ; and
Whereas, if the present trend continues there is grave peril that the
United States of America will stand substantially alone in a world that has
become Communist or pro-Communist neutral ; and
Whereas, if we are to tvirn the tide in the cold war it is essential that we
develop coimteraction to the international Commimist conspiracy into an opera-
tional science that bespeaks and benefits the values and methods of free men
ami that we train men and women in large numbers who can combat the
Communist conspiracy with an equal or greater degree of "know-how" and
dedication ; and
Whereas, there have been introduced in the House of Representatives of
the Congress of the United States by A. S. Herlong, Jr., of Florida, and Walter
.Tudd, of Minnesota, a bill (H.R. 3880) and in the Senate by Karl Mundt, of
South Dakota, and Paul Douglas, of Illinois, a bill (S. 1689), entitled "The
Freedom Commission Act," which this association believes set forth the training
and development program necessary to insure the long-term survival of this
Nation and the other nations of the free world ;
Notv, therefore, he it resolved, that the Reserve OflBcers Association of the
United States go on record as endorsing the passage of The Freedom Com-
mission Act.
Adopted, 34th National Convention New York City, 1 July 1960.
The Chairman. This committee is indeed honored to welcome Ar-
lei£:h A. Burke, former Chief of Naval Operations, as the lead witness
of this morning's session.
Admiral, we are always glad to have you with us, and I don't sup-
pose there is anybody who does not laiow you, and it is rather odd to
ask you to give any part of your background, all of which is good.
But in an effort to relate it to your interest in this bill or what experi-
ence prompts you to favor it, as a beginning in your presentation, we
will be very gratified to receive a brief resume of your background.
Admiral Burke. Thank you, sir.
STATEMENT OF ADMIRAL ARLEIGH A. BURKE, UNITED STATES
NAVY (RETIRED), FORMER CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS
Admiral Burke. Yes, sir. First, Mr. Chairman, I would like to
state that I appreciate very much appearing before this distinguished
Committee on Un-American Activities on these bills. I have no
written statement, but I do have some notes that I would like to speak
from.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1421
You asked about my background. My background in connection
with this activity, or with communism, started seriously during the
Korean war.
At the beginning of the Korean war, I was ordered by Admiral
Sherman, as soon as the war started, to go to the staff of Commander,
Naval Forces, Far East. When it looked like it was possible to negoti-
ate an armistice, I was appointed to the Armistice Negotiating Com-
mission.
We had about 10 days in which to prepare ourselves to negotiate
with the Communists. During those 10 days, we picked up every
book that we could get in the libraries in Japan and in our armed
services there, to determine how the Communists negotiated, what
they might do, and I might say that the books that we were able to
get were very few. There was only one good one. I think it was
Operations of the Polithureau or sometliing like that.
When we started negotiating with the Communists, it became very
apparent in the first few minutes that they were taking advantage of
us. They were skillful propagandists. They were using the occa-
sion to show the whole world that we had been defeated.
For example, there was preliminary negotiation as to where the
negotiations would be held, and it was finally determined that they
would be held in Kaesong, and our team, five of us, went up to Kaesong
in helicopters. We landed at the Missionary Field of the Methodist
University, which had been destroyed.
We were met by North Korean and Chinese troops, and there was
a thick cordon of troops around the landing field, white flags all over
it. We were put in jeeps, and the jeep that I was assigned to was
a captured American jeep, as they all were; a bullet hole through the
windshield, blood on the seat, the name "Lucy" on the jeep.
I don't know whether this was American blood or not, but it was
quite obvious that the impression they wanted to give was that they
had captured this jeep, killed the driver, and it was their jeep. A great
big white flag — no other identification — a great big white flag on the
front of the jeep, and we went up with an escort, a military escort
of the Communists, through, again, a cordon of troops clear to the ne-
gotiating building, which was a teahouse in Kaesong.
When we arrived there, we had to walk perhaps a hundred yards,
again through a cordon of troops, with submachineguns^ following
each man as we came up, and, for example, one young Korean was
standing in front of a bush, and he had to be out in the path a little
bit. He was perhaps 15 or 16 years old, and as I was walking up there,
he put the machinegun muzzle in my stomach. It was just a little bit
more than I could take at that time, because I was fed up with this,
and I took the machinegun away from him and handed it back to
him. which was a foolish thing to do, but fortunately, his finger wasn't
on the trigger or his automatic reaction would have been bad for
me.
But this was an example of the propaganda — movie cameras grind-
ing all the time, with Americans coming up to surrender at this
negotiation.
During the negotiations, we soon found that the Communists could
lie, did lie, and it did not bother them a bit. They could be caught
in lies and they could pass probably a polygraph test, because they
1422 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
didn't feel guilty about anything, about lying. It is something that
an American just can't realize, that there is no moral base to negotiate
on — with people like that.
And this was when I first decided that we had to do a tremendous
amount of studying. We sent back for books and data from which
to study past negotiations. We got a big pile of data, but very little
data which would do us any good.
Well, the results of those negotiations are well known.
Mr. JoHANSEN. May I internij^t at that point, Admiral ? What was
the date of this episode you have just described ?
Admiral Burke. I believe it was July 10, 1951.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Thank you.
Admiral Burke. The next thing that concerned me, again the result
of the Korean war, was our prisoners. When they returned, we found
that a few of our troops had accommodated themselves to communism
in the prison camps, and a very few of them had sold their brother
soldiers' lives for a cigarette or for special treatment. This was, of
course, a shock to all of us in the military services, and we started to
examine why.
Later, I was Chief of Naval Operations, and as soon as I became
Chief of Naval Operations, I asked for an examination of our recruits
to determine what their moral standards were, and it was a surprising
thing that we found that a great many of our recruits didn't have any
moral standards.
They weren't unmoral, they were just amoral. They had no con-
victions concerning their God or their church or their community or
their State or their school or anything. Nothing meant very much
to some of the^e boys. Their standard was "what is good for me."
Now this wasn't because these youngsters were bad youngsters.
They weren't, and they very eagerly picked up the instruction that
we gave them on what this United States stands for, what God stands
for, and various simple things, and these lads eagerly picked up that
instruction. They just simply hadn't been instructed before. This
was a shock.
Later on, as Chief of Naval Operations, I had a great deal to do
for 6 years with operations against the Communists or operations
which were the result of Communist actions. When I retired from
tlie Navy, I wanted to do something that might help my country a
little bit, so I decided that I would like to become associated with
three general types of activities. One is energy, because the Com-
munists, or any nation that wants to become powerful, must have
sources of energy. And without sources of energy, it is so dependent
upon other countries that it probably will never become a really
powerful nation.
And the next one was communications. Communications and trans-
portation, the whole communication bit; and the third one is educa-
tion. And those generally are the areas of the commercial companies
with which I am now associated, and it is true that I have found since
retirement, as well as before, that the Communists are working to try
to get control of communications, to try to get control of energy, and,
above all, to try to get control of education ; and it is the educational
part that is important here, sir.
PROVIDIXG FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1423
Mr. JoHANSEN. How long did you serve, Admiral, in the United
States Xavy ?
Admiral Burke. 42 years, sir. And would it be all right for me to
read my notes ?
The Chairman. Proceed.
Admiral Burke. The first point that I would like to make, sir, is
that of all the people in the United States, this committee, you your-
selves are probably the most familiar with the Communist goals and
objectives and their past actions, the Communist intentions, the Com-
munist techniques, and their falsehoods, their lies.
You know, I don't want to repeat the Communist intentions, but cer-
tainly it is true, because they have said so over and over and over
again, that they intend to dominate the world, and every action that
they have taken, even the backward steps that they have had to take
sometimes, have had that goal in mind, and they never deviate from
that goal. This is true with all the Communists in every area. They
have a clear outline. Every Communist has a clear outline of where
the Communists intend to go and, in general, how to get there, and the
Communists are well trained.
Xow, there is no such clear outline of our intentions. Sometimes,
the reactions of this countrj' and other free world countries are very
forceful, and sometimes we act as if we were powerless and helpless.
There has been a cold war ever since World War II. It is unconven-
tional, it is psychological, it is subversive, it is political, and it is prop-
aganda warfare; and we seem never to realize that this is a continuous
proposition. We take action when things appear to be bad, and when
things appear to slacken off, then we forget all about it. And we don't
take action in all the fields, even when we do take action.
The Communists use every means that they possibly can to get sup-
port for their ideas, and particularly ideas which will weaken our
moral stamina, which will weaken our will to resist, and which will
weaken such things as our belief in God, our beliefs in our Govern-
ment. There are quite a few innocent, gullible people in the United
States who are led to support causes which further the undermining
of our character. They do this, unknowingly, for the benefit of
communism.
The Comrnimists know what they are doing. They are well trained.
There are many schools in many Communist countries t-o train thou-
sands of people, and they have trained thousands of people in political
warfare, in journalism, in ideology, and guerrilla warfare, m all the
aspects of the power play that the Communists are putting on. Of
course this started with the Lenin School of Political Warfare in
Moscow many years ago.
And our people are not trained. The best trained people in the
United Statas are self-trained people, and as a result of our lack of
training, even though we act with the utmost goodwill, we frequently
act without any very clear idea of what the Communists may be trying
to accomplish or how they are trying to accomplish it.
Our actions are unconcerted. We don't act in all areas, and we don't
act in all fields toward a single goal. Because of this, we frequently
play into the enemy's hands. In other words, we are amateurs, and
the Communists are professionals.
1424 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
But in spite of this, I would like to pay tribute to those amateurs.
There are a lot of them. There are academicians in many miiversities
and colleges who have devoted, when they once became aware of the
danger, a great deal of time to studying the problem, and they are
doing quite a bit of good.
There are labor unions who are taking the lead, because of all the
classes of people in this country who miderstand communism the
best, it is probably the labor people, because they have gone into
foreign countries they reahze what has happened in foreign coun-
tries. They know that there is no such thing as a labor movement in
any Communist country, and they have taken some veiy laudable
action.
The Chairman. I am glad you mentioned that. Admiral, and on
this point, I was pleased to be advised quite some time ago that the
AFL-CIO, through George Meany, at its own expense, had created
an Institute for Free Labor Development here in Washington to fight
communism.
Admiral Burke. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And they have students from Latin America who
come here to learn about free trade unionism and also communism.
Some of them have gone back home to Latin America and disseminated
the information they have gathered here and have averted Communist
takeovers of the unions and, in some instances, regained control of
unions from the Commmiists. I am glad of the compliment you have
paid to the free labor movement.
Admiral Burke. That is a very laudable thing, sir, and they are
trying very hard, but even the people who are teaching here are
themselves self-taught.
The Chairman. Well, you are absolutely right, and to put it in a
different way — the way I frequently put it in connection with what
you said to the effect that we act when things are hot, and relax when
they cool off — we have tended too long to fight the cold war on the
basis of instinct and emotion rather than knowledge, and what we are
trying to do here is to have an institute with knowledge about these
things which you have experienced over your long career.
Admiral Burke. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Particularly in connection with your negotiations
in Korea.
Admiral Burke. Yes, sir.
Mr. Johansen. The fact of the matter is — and I think I have
mentioned this on the record before — but probably the first docu-
mentation of Communist infiltration, of the attempt to take over in
this countiy was made in the. labor field.
That first documentation was made under Mr. William Green, back
in 1933, as I recall it, at the time that the recognition of Soviet Russia
was being considered.
Admiral Burke. Yes, sir; that is, of course, the first thing; the first
institutions the Communists want to try to infiltrate are the labor and
educational institutions. And they do a very good job at it.
And then there are a lot of industrialists, particularly the big con-
cerns, who have realized what happens to a country when it becomes
Communist.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COIVIMISSION 1425
The Chairman. You are so right, Admiral — and we don't want to
interrupt you — you liave i)ut your finger on it. It is the fact that
although they make laudable and noble efforts, they are so scattered
in this country. There is no central area where people in labor, Gov-
ernment, business, foreign countries, can come and get a working
knowledge of the techniques, ideology, doctrines, and tactics, all the
machinations of the Communist conspiracy. And they haven't done
too badly, have they, the Communists, along the line of attempted
domination? In the short space of my and your generation, we have
seen them take over and dominate maybe one third of the land mass
of the earth and one fourth of the population of the world, and that's
not too bad.
Admiral Burke. No, sir. Well, in spite of the efforts, sir, of in-
dividuals, there are a lot of people in this country — the fact is, I sup-
pose, most of the people in this country — who don't really realize the
danger of communism at all. There is a great deal of apathy, and
most of this apathy is caused because people don't know.
They think the Government will take care of it. The Government
hasn't informed them, and so they don't know very much about it.
People have not been told by the Government as much about commu-
nism as a farmer is told about how to fatten a beef or the dangers
of a boll weevil.
A person can obtain from the Government a great deal of informa-
tion about the dangers from insects, but he can't obtain from the Gov-
ernment very much about the dangers from communism, even though
the FBI does try mightily.
Our people, including people in Government positions, are not well
informed and they are not knowledgeable on Communist procedures
Or techniques, or even the differences in the meaning of the words when
they are used by the Communists and when they are used by us.
I am sure that there is a need for an educational institution similar
to the one that is proposed in these bills, and particularly in the ones
that Mr. Boggs and Mr. Taft sponsored.
There is need for such an institution to conduct research on Com-
munist techniques, to instruct, and to inform. Private institutions
can't do it, although there are a lot of private institutions which are
trying; they can help. The reason is largely that a policy must be
clearly approved by the Government — and one is not clearly approved
now — and it must also be clearly understood that this is the intent
of Congress, and this is not clear now, either.
In addition to that, there are many Government officials who need
training which a private institution would not be able to give. There
are foreign people who should have access to the leadership of the
leader of the free world, and now there is no place for them to go,
as you pointed out a moment ago.
Then it takes time for a private institution to get these things
started, lots of time, and I don't think we have that kind of time
left anymore.
It has also been proposed that perhaps the State Department could
expand their schools, and this would have been possible. But if the
State Department had intended to expand their schools, it would have
been done a long time ago, and it hasn't been done, so I don't think
that they could take it over.
1426 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
I favor H.R. 5368, and if I were permitted to make some comments
on the bill, I would like to make
The Chairman. We would like very much to have the benefit of
your material. This bill may not be final. It is subject to im-
provement.
Admiral Burke. Yes, sir. In this bill, there is a Committee, an
Advisory Committee to advise the Commission, and I would suggest
that that Committee should meet at least monthly. The reason for
that is that this Committee must know thoroughly what is being done
by the Conmiission and within this institution.
It must assist the Commission. The Commission is going to be
under fire. It is going to be a most difficult job to be on that Com-
mission, and this Committee can help the Commissioners a great deal,
if it really knows what is involved. The Committee members must
know intimately the status of the research, the type of teaching, the
quality of the teachers, and everything there is about the school.
This is particularly true because once such an institution is estab-
lished and if it starts to function well, it will certainly, itself, be a
prime target for subversion and distortion. It will be viciously at-
tacked, and there will be attempts to discredit the institution and the
Commission. The Government, and especially the Congress, will need
to rely on people who are not in the direct management of the institu-
tion, but people who nevertheless are thoroughly familiar with all the
aspects of the institution and the persomiel connected with it, and who
are charged by the Congress to keep Congress informed of the possible
difficulties which the institution may have before those difficulties be-
come acute, or become insurmountable, as they might.
And perhaps even monthly meetings are not enough. This institu-
tion is of sufficient importance to warrant careful and continuous
appraisal.
I would like to go back a moment, sir, to training. And I have here
two recent newspaper articles. One of them was written for the Neio
York Times on 31 March; the other, for the Washington Post on May
16, 1964. They are about South Vietnam. The Times article says:
The South Vietnamese Government started today an emergency training pro-
gram for young army officers who have the task of bringing effective government
to the people of the villages.
Special courses for the country's district chiefs marked an important first
step * * *.
I would like to insert these two articles in the record, if I might, sir,
because it is about starting today, and then —
The Chairman. The articles will be incorporated in the record.
(See pp. 1439-1441.)
The Chairman. At that point, do you find that whatever effort is
being made in Vietnam and elsewhere places sufficient, or too much,
or not enough, reliance on people themselves, the villages, and so on ?
Admiral Burke. Well, I have been in the Orient quite a bit in my
life, sir, and the people in the Orient, the villages, are very poor peo-
ple, and they are very simple people and they are also very gullible
people in lots of ways. They have been misruled sometimes, sometimes
for generations in the past, so that the instruction that has to be given
to them has to be started from the ground up — in sympathy with their
conditions and trying to help them out, but at the same time, the most
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1427
important thing that any man can have, whether he is rich or poor, is
a philosophy, is an ideology, and something in which to believe, some-
thing that he can do about what he believes, and this is what I think is
mostly lacking in our training. We don't convince.
We help them out materially and we show them how, sometimes, to
grow better crops, but we don't furnish them a belief, a conviction,
which the Communists do.
The Chairman. In that connection, it has been expressed as a the-
oi-y, and let's assume it to be completely sincere, always — that is my
approach, anyway — that the establishment of this Commission outside
of the State Department might place these problems in the hands of
amateurs who are liable to want to indoctrinate, and so on.
Wliat are your views on that? Don't you think the Commission,
assuming the appointment of outstanding men, will certainly have
sense enough to operate within our Constitution? With respect to
the proposition that the Sate Department, with its constitutional for-
eign policy prerogatives, might not like every part of what the Aca-
demy teaches, and the fact that the President must determine foreign
policy — can't all this be done without injecting the Academy into the
field of foreign policy, keeping it aside of that, clear of that, even while
it provides knowledge ?
Do you fear indoctrination, amateurism, and all that stuff ?
Admiral Burke. No, sir.
(At this point Mr. Pool entered the hearing room. )
Admiral Burke. In the first place, this institution is an educational
institution. It is not an operating institution and it doesn't deter-
mine policies.
The Chairman. I am glad you said that. It needed to be said, to re-
move honest fear.
Admiral Burke. And there are many institutions that do indoctri-
nation. A church does indoctrination. The State Department itself
does indoctrination. The Executive of the United States indoctri-
nates. Political parties do indoctrination. There are hundreds of
groups in this country who indoctrinate for one thing or another.
A farmer, who is in an agricultural school, is indoctrinated in the
advantages of farming. He is proud of being a farmer.
This is true in everything, but what is needed here is knowledge of
communism. The greatest danger that faces this country is the Com-
munist danger, now, and we don't have the knowledge, and where are
we going to get that knowledge ? We don't have any institutions. A
lot of institutions are trying very hard to give a little bit of knowledge.
They are insufficient. They are inadequate. They certainly can't
train governmental officials, they can't train foreign officials, they can't
instruct them. There is no information that comes from the Govern-
ment on a continuing basis, or that is very deep. When an academician
wants to start a course on communism there is no place he can write to
in the Government and get such data. He can get data on how to grow
wheat, but he can't get it on communism.
The Chairman. Now I would like the benefit of your experience
and views and for you to pass judgment — without any sense of casti-
gating or criticizing what we have today — on these courses we are all
familiar with, for officers, and so on. Are they thorough enough?
Admiral Burke. In Government, sir ?
1428 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
The Chairman. In Government. In other words, we would have
to face the fact that it would be said that we are making a finding,
whether we are making it or not, that what we have is not sufficient.
Admiral Btjrke. Then the finding, I think, would be correct, sir.
The Chairman. Well, I would like to have you say a few words
about that, because the opposition, such as it is, to the bill says we
already have that, and that if we need something more, then there is
the counterproposal, countering our thinking on the possibility of pas-
sage of this bill, that we should instead have a school of foreign — what
is the name of the proposal ?
Mr. McNamara. National Academy of Foreign Affairs.
The Chairman. A National Academy of Foreign Affairs within
the State Department as a substitute or counter to this proposal.
Admiral Burke. In the first place, sir, I would like to
The Chairman. So we can't avoid talking about what we have to
face.
Admiral Burke. To start with the military. I am on the advisory
board of the National War College and I am fairly familiar, even
since I have been retired, with what the other War Colleges do, and
they give a few courses on communism. They are not exactly super-
ficial courses, but they do not really explain Communist techniques.
They make the students aware that there are techniques, that there is
such a thing as propaganda, and they teach them a little bit about se-
mantics, but the courses are not in depth at all.
It is even less than that, unless they have changed a great deal in
the last year or so, in the Foreign Service's school. There are a few
lectures, and those lectures are not coordinated. There is no real
instruction, not nearly as much instruction in the Foreign Service's
school as there is in the War Colleges, but the War Colleges are ex-
tremely inadequate.
The Chairman. We have had testimony based on teaching experi-
ence here — and on my own, I have always said that I am glad some-
body else said this, rather than myself, because some State legislatures,
including my own, in Louisiana, by statute, require a course on Com-
munism versus Democracy — but the testimony indicates that the trou-
ble in these courses is that there is so little knowledge on the part of
the public school teacher as to what to teach, what to say, and their
source material is so scanty.
Admiral Burke, Yes, sir.
The Chairman. It is very discouraging.
Admiral Burke. That is true. I have been asked by Florida and by
other States to help them in their curricula. A little bit I have been
able to do, not very much, but when they ask me, I am an amateur.
There is nobody, or very few people in this country who have really
studied this in depth.
The Chairman. Well, taking you at your humble word, would
your "amateur" experience in this area be available to the Commission ?
Admiral Burke. Yes, sir; anything that the Government wants
me to do, I do, because I came into the service for a lifetime and I
haven't quite expended it yet, sir. This training that we have, com-
pared to the techniques of the Communists, is really fantastically
poor, sir. I have here an article that is called "Population Control
Techniques of Communist Insurgents." It appeared in the Australian
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1429
Army Jmii^nal^ in January of 1964, and it explains in detail how a
few Communists, two or three Communists, come into a village and
work with that village, never saying anything about communism until
they get the villagers' confidence and support.
They help the villagers. Later on they organize a few people, two
or three people, and then later on, they take over, and that village,
then, is a Communist village. It became that way because it was
instructed.
It was instructed by Communists, and we have no counterpart to
that. We have nobody who knows how to do that, and the techniques
are different for each country. This is the reason why the Communists
have hundreds of different schools, or lots of different schools, to train
different people in different techniques in different countries, but all
for the same goal.
The Chairman. Would that article be available for the record?
Admiral Burke. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. The article will be inserted following your testi-
mony. (See pp. 1442-1449.)
(At this point Mr. Willis left the hearing room.)
Mr. Pool (presiding). Proceed, Admiral.
Mr. JoHANSEN. I don't think the Admiral had finished his state-
ment, had he 1
Admiral Burke. Yes, sir, I have.
Mr. Pool. Let me ask you. Admiral, you are familiar with the na-
tional defense budgets, and do you think that maybe a staggering
sum would be needed to accomplish this job that the Freedom Acad-
emy encompasses? Do you think that the money would be well
spent ?
Admiral Burke. It will take quite a bit of money, sir, because it
will be started late, and the buildings will have to go up, should go
up, fairly fast, so I should imagine that it would probably be in
the neighborhood of $30 or $40 million.
Mr. Pool. You think that that would be money well spent?
Admiral Burke. Yes, sir, because the Communists have made in-
roads in all parts of the world. We have not. The expansion has
been on the Communist side, not on our side, so something is wrong
with our instruction. We are not convincing people, and I believe
our system of government, our social order, our whole concept of
civilization is good, and I think the Communist concept is evil, but we
aren't instructing people about what is good.
Mr. Pool. The work that this Academy would accomplish, would
be almost as important as the work that is accomplished by the Naval
Academy and West Point and things like that ?
Admiral Bltrke. I think at that stage of the game, sir, it would
be even more important, because there is a big lack in such educa-
tion now, and I don't mean to decry my Naval Academy or the other
service academies, either.
Mr. Pool. Well, I wasn't pinpointing any particular academy.
Admiral Burke. Yes, sir.
Mr. Pool. It is just as important, then, as the other schools. In
fact, in your opinion, it is more important at this stage.
Admiral Burke. Yes, sir.
Mr, Pool. I agree with you. And I thank you, sir.
30-471 O— 64— pt. 2 13
1430 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
Mr. Ichord?
Mr. Ichord. Admiral, the function of the Commission is threefold :
To conduct research into communism, how it operates, how it fights,
and how you can best combat it ; to train Government personnel, pri-
vate citizens, and foreign citizens at the institution ; and also to oper-
ate the information center.
The State Department has criticized the bill on the ground that
the Freedom Academy will here be functioning as an overt institu-
tion, while it should operate as a covert institution. Do you feel
that criticism is well founded ?
Admiral Burke. No, sir. I think that what is needed
Mr. Ichord. Would you elaborate upon that, sir ?
Admiral Burke. Yes, sir. What is needed most is an overt opera-
tion. This, so that our people and the Communists and everybody
knows that this is the way the Communists operate. This is what they
do, these are the proofs. This is what happened in Zanzibar. This is
the way they handle the press in various countries. This is the line
that they start in Moscow or Peking, and this is the trace of that line of
propaganda, from one position to another, until finally, its origin is
lost, and it is repeated in free world countries as honest news. These
things are very important.
Now there should also be some covert operating institution that
trains people not only to study the techniques, but to train people in
the countertechniques, but that would be an operations school. This
is not an operations institution. The Communists themselves have a
great many overt schools and a great many covert schools, and some-
times they have elements in the same school in which one is overt and
one is covert, but I think this overt school is needed first.
Mr. Ichord. Do you think that it is necessary to train private citi-
zens at this institution ?
Admiral Burke. Yes, sir; not every private citizen, of course, but
certainly it is necessary to train academicians who are teaching in
miiversities, the social sciences, for example. It is important they
know the techniques of commmiism and to give them a source of
information.
It is necessary to give, and they should have, a very thorough course.
They should have thorough knowledge of these data. It is necessary,
also, for industrialists, for example, to come down and get a short
course in aspects which will affect them and which they can do some-
tliing about. It is necessary that the labor unions, labor people, be
instructed so that workers Imow what they are up against, what this
country is up against. It is extremely necessary.
There are three types of people who need the instruction. There is
the private citizen, the governmental officials, and foreigners. Per-
haps the instruction might be a little different for the three, but much
of the instruction should be similiar or identical.
Mr. Ichord. How do you feel we can go about selecting foreign
citizens for training at the Academy ?
Admiral Burke. It is ^oing to be very difficult, sir, and you will cer-
tainly get some Communists in here, no matter what you do. I mean,
the Communists will try to penetrate this school, this institution,
every way that they possibly can, and one of the ways is to send Com-
munist students so that they can get as much information as they
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1431
possibl}?^ can in order to sabotage the school. The best way of getting
people is on the recommendation of their own government, and we
know a lot of f oi'eign people, too, who can check.
I mean, there are foreign people who are mature, who are usually
pretty well known by some Americans, or at least, for example, a
Frenchman is known to other Frenchmen whom Americans know, and
his reputation will be pretty well known. But certainly there will be
some Communists that will go through the school.
Mr. IcHORD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Pool. Mr. Johansen?
Mr. Johansen. I am going to yield for a moment to Mr. Schadeberg,
and then I will come back.
Mr. Schadeberg. Thank you.
Admiral, you don't have to answer this if you don't wish to, and
you may not want to. If our foreign policy should be, either now or
at some future date, that we must not do anything to create tensions
between ourselves and the Soviets, and this Academy might be inter-
preted as creating such a tension, what would be the argument that we
could use then ?
Admiral Burke. The truth. The first thing that should be taught
in this institution is the truth. If the Communists object to the truth,
let them. If they say, "This is not true," let them try to disprove it.
For example, after this institution was started, and they say, "This
teaches that we do so and so, and that's not true," and we will say,
"Well, these are the facts. What's wrong with those facts?" And if
the truth hurts, if an institution is going to be objected to because it
teaches the truth, then we are in a very bad way indeed.
Mr. Schadeberg. I agree with you in that, but the question that
might be involved is that we are working at odds and at ends with our
State Department policy, if such a policy were stated.
Admiral Burke. Well, if two commercial concerns want to better
their relationships for any reason at all, maybe to have a merger, the
first thing that each concern has to do, is to look at the books and to
find out what are the facts, and .then you have to confront the manage-
ment of the other concern and say, "These are the facts," and "This
is what I believe the facts to be."
And those facts never hurt anybody. Because if you don't base a
relationship upon facts, upon what is true, then your relationship is
very tenuous, and so the Communists would have no grounds for
objection, and should have no objection, to the teaching of facts.
Now there is another aspect of this. Certainly in all of their
schools^they have hundreds of schools which teach wrong things
that are absolutely false about our institutions, about what we do.
They teach the destruction of our social order and how to do us in.
If it is important that we have a detente with the Soviets or with the
Communists, then it is also important that they stop teaching what
is not true, before we stop teaching what is true. In other words,
the onus is on them, not on us.
Mr. Schadeberg. There I agree with you. I have a suspicion that
if we ever had the Academy, we probably would never arrive at a posi-
tion in which we had that policy.
Admiral Burke. Well, perhaps not, sir.
Mr. Schadeberg. Thank you.
1432 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
Mr. JoHANSEN. Admiral, there is some degree of parallel between
what is proposed in this Commission and the Freedom Academy and
some of the things that were attempted some years back in the Armed
Forces in the way of instruction regarding communism and Com-
munist activities.
And isn't it true that a great many of those efforts, following the
Fulbright memorandum, were suspended so far as the military is
concerned ?
Admiral Burke. Yes, sir. And it is true this would be very similar
in some respects to that instruction given to the military services, but
the primary emphasis in the military services was on what this
country stood for, upon our traditions, and what it took to be a good
United States citizen. There was a lot of mstruction on what you do
to support this man alongside of you, so that when you find yourself
in a foxhole and the going gets pretty rough, you can depend upon
him staying there. You have no fear deep down in your heart that
he is going to do what they call in Korea "bug out on you" and
leave you there to face a bayonet charge, or whatever, all by yourself.
He is going to be there. You can depend on him. Those are the
things that we primarily try to teach in the military services. Now
also, there are things such as good citizenship, that you work for your
community, that you work for your country.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Well, am I correct in the impression that, unfortu-
nately, a great deal of that type of activity has been suspended or
terminated ?
Admiral Burke. Yes, sir. That is true, but in fairness to the peo-
ple who had it stopped, there were times when people went too far. I
mean, when they said things which were not quite correct, and that
will always have to be watched in any institution ; but, in general, it
seems a very sad thing to me when you can't teach that our history
is a glorious thing and that the people who went before us and who
created this country did some pretty good things in their lives, and
that we are up against an enemy who says, and says repeatedly, and
have throughout their entire existence, that they intend to destroy us
and that they intend to destroy us not just by war, but by every other
means, and that they subvert.
We have many examples every year of subversion and attempts at
subversion. Every 2 or 3 months we go through another lesson, and
it is very important, I think, that our people know this and know
where it stems from.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Well, it seems to me that the fact that this program
in the military ran into difficulty is all the more reason why we need
the type of program contemplated in the Freedom Commission and
the Freedom Academy.
Admiral Burke. Yes, sir; and this institution would give instruc-
tion in much greater detail and real depth, which they could not pos-
sibly do in the military.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Well, now, we had testimony before this committee
by a very high-ranking spokesman of the State Department, who ex-
pressed unqualified opposition to it. He said that it involved, or im-
plied that it involved, instilling into the people who were brought
to the Academy preconceived ideas, that it involved indoctrination,
that it involved employing the very methods of totalitarianism.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1433
I happen to disagree very strongly about that, but it is a matter of
great concern to me that there is opposition from some spokesmen, at
least, in the State Department on these flimsy and, I think, invalid
grounds.
Now what happens to this Commission and to the Academy and its
program if the official policy of the United States Government as
expressed by the State Department, is that all communism isn't alike,
that commmiism in Soviet Russia is getting more and more mellow,
that the real objectives of world conquest are being modified, and as
my colleague said, on top of that, we must not say or do anything
that creates tension ?
My great concern is, if we have that kind of a conflict between the
facts as developed in the Academy and the official policy of the State
Department, what happens to the Academy and to its program?
Admiral Burke. It will never be built, sir. It will never be built,
or if it is built, then it won't function.
Mr. JoHANSEN. And then we are in deep trouble.
Admiral Burke. Then eventually, if you have an aggressive hard-
hitting, dedicated enemy, and he intends to do you in, and you don't
intend to resist and to fight back, then eventually he will get you. And
in this case, if it is that we believe that the Communists are changing,
and they are, in fact, not changing, and they mislead us, and we don't
do anything to resist their attacks, we will eventually succumb. We
will eventually become a Communist state.
Now, I don't think that that is what they mean. What some people
believe is that the Communists are going to become mellow and not
ti*y to dominate the world. But a man can't be a Communist and
follow the Communist doctrine unless he intends to have commimism
take control of the world, to dominate the world. That is their belief —
their creed — their doctrine.
But there is evidence in the Soviet Union that there are a lot of
people who do not believe in communism, and that is true. I mean,
there are farmers in Kazakstan, for example, who sabotaged a tre-
mendous amount of fertilizer. They didn't grow the wheat that they
should have grown — some of it due to nature, but a lot of it also due
to sabotage by Soviet fanners.
Now these people, some day, if there are enough of them and if there
is enough conviction, may destroy communism within. Russia, but it
won't be that the Communists have changed. It will be successors to
the Communists who will have revolted against communism. It won't
be the softening of the Communists or the changing of ideas of the
Communists, it will be the changing of the ideas of the Russian people
who will overthrow communism. This is possible but not very prob-
able.
Mr. Johansen. But in essence, they, therefore, would be anti-
Communists.
Admiral Burke. Exactly.
Mr. Johansen. And it is not moderating of communism, it is an
offsetting of communism.
Admiral Burke. Yes, sir. So that is why they had purges in Ka-
zakstan in the last year or so. Why the Kremlin sent troops in to
control these elements.
1434 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
Mr. JoHANSEN. Well, I couldn't agree with the argument more, the
statement he has made.
Mr. Pool. I have one other question. Do you think that our posi-
sion in South Vietnam would be better today if we had had this
Academy 10 years ago ?
Admiral Burke. Yes, sir ; I think so, because I think that we would
have understood thoroughly the techniques of the Communists in
saying, "Let us have a peaceful coexistence in this particular area, and
let us get along together" — until they build their cadres in various
villages and take over, as in Laos. Instead, we didn't understand.
We didn't know that we were being conned. We took them at their
word, and now we are in a very bad shai>e, because they have built
their strength up in southeast Asia, and we have not.
We haven't been able to convince enough people in South Vietnam
or Laos or Cambodia that their freedom is important to them and to us.
Mr. Pool. This Academy — we can envision that it would have
taught the Communist technique ; therefore, we would have been alert
and we would have the intelligence and also the antidote for their
propaganda, if we had had an Academy like this.
Admiral Burke. I think so, yes, sir, although there would have to
be additional schools in addition to this Academy for the operating
people, and that would have to be under some governmental depart-
ment.
Mr. JoHANSEN. One further question, Mr. Chairman.
Against the background of your military career and j^our service as
Chief of Naval Operations, would you envision the military utilizing
and benefiting from the facilities of this Freedom Academy ?
Admiral Burke. Yes, sir.
Mr. JoHANSEN. And in what way, just for the record?
Admiral Burke. Well, I believe that there should be some military
people who would go through this Academy to become knowledgeable,
thoroughly knowledgeable, but that there wouldn't be a large number
of military people who would take the course. It would be similar
to the reason why I took courses in and became a chemical engineer,
so that I could operate as a liaison officer between the chemical engi-
neering profession and the Navy.
I knew what the chemical engineers were talking about and I could
explain to my associates in the Navy what was meant, what this new
explosive was, how it was built, and what the advantages and dis-
advantages of it were. The same thing would be true with this
Academy, sir.
Mr. JoHANSEN. In other words, hoping that we don't have any
further repetitions of the experience you described in connection with
the Korean armistice, but in any situation of that kind, involving deals
with the Communists, you would not have to be prowling through
limited libraries in Japan, you would have access to the information
and material that would make persons in that situation knowledgeable
before they went into them. Isn't that correct i
Admiral Burke. Yes, sir; and there would also have been staff
people who could be sent out — like lawyers, for example, are available
when legal problems arise. You can't conduct any sort of a legal
proceeding without a lawyer being there, an expert, and he is at your
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1435
hand to advise you on what to do, and the same thing could be true
in dealing with or negotiating with Communists.
(At this point Mr. Pool left the hearing room.)
Mr. JoHANSEN. One final question. Recognizing that — and I am
paraphrasing the statement of Churchill's that weakness is not treason,
but it can be just as fatal, isn't it true that lack of knowledge and
lack of skill and lack of know-how, which leads to ineptness and
blunders and mistakes, however well intentioned, can be just as fatal
as disloyalty ?
Admiral Burke. Yes, sir.
Mr. JoHANSEN. And that that's the very reason we need the kind
of training for persons in key positions in education or business or
labor or Government, who will know the nature of the enemy that we
are confronted with ?
Admiral Burke. Yes, sir. You are exactly correct, sir.
Mr. Johansen. Thank you.
Mr. IcHORD (presiding). Admiral, Mr. Grant, the founder of the
Orlando Committee which originated this idea, testified before the
committee and made some very serious charges concerning the inade-
quacy of the training offered along this line by the existing institutions.
We gave the State Department an opportunity to answer those
charges. However, I don't think there is anything in the record re-
futing the charges that he did make.
You are, of course, familiar with the War College. What was your
comment about the courses offered at the War College?
Admiral Burke. Well, the War College courses are good, but they
aren't very thorough and they are not very deep. They are not super-
ficial, either, they are of value, but there are just a few weeks spent on
this subject, and you can't learn this in a few weeks.
(At this point Mr. Pool returned to the hearing room.)
Admiral Burke, You can't learn anything that is important and
complex in a few weeks. It takes months and months of study, and
they simply can't devote the time to that. There are a great many
people in the State Department, I am sure, who have studied this
themselves and who realize the tremendous effort it takes to get a
knowledge of communism and Communist techniques.
But there is no formal education, there is no formal way of getting
anything real. If somebody from, say a commercial concern, feels
that perhaps he would like to put a plant, say, in Chile, at the moment,
and he knows that there is a big Communist element in Chile and he
wants to know as much as he can about the Communist techniques,
where does he go to get it ?
He has got to read a tremendous number of books and put a couple
of staff people on that for a long time before he gets those techniques.
Mr. IcHORD. The reports of the State Department in the committee
files all state that the objectives of this legislation are praiseworthy
and laudable in their words, but they are all opposed to the establish-
ment of the Academy, and I might point out that the committee has
developed that President Kennedy was very interested in this pro-
posal of the Orlando Committee and prompted the State Department
to move in regard to it, and they, in turn, came forth with the National
Academy of Foreign Affairs as a substitute for this measure. I think
1436 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
their main objection to the bill is that it will get over into the juris-
diction of the State Department.
Do you think that this institution can function and give us some-
thing that we do need without conflicting too greatly with State
Department work ?
Admiral Burke. I don't think it will conflict at all with the State
Department work so long as this institution stays out of operations,
and it is not the intent of the institution to be in operations.
The State Department controls our foreign policy, or the President,
and they do the operating. They take the results ; they take the prod-
uct of this institution, or some of the product of this institution, and
use those people, but they direct their operations, not this Freedom
Academy.
Mr. IcHORD. In that respect, then, the Academy would work pretty
much like Annapolis or West Point or the Air Force.
Admiral Burke. Or like the National War College. The State
Department sends a great number of people, and is very eager to get
more people, into the National War College. It has no control over the
National War College at all, except there is one member of the State
Department on the National War College advisory board. Those
people get very good training in the overall things that are given to
the military, and it is very important to them. People who have
graduated from the National War College find that it is extremely
useful, because they have greater knowledge of what the military as-
pects are.
Well, what they need in addition to that is greater knowledge of
what the Communist techniques are, and many of them do not have
this.
Mr. IcHORD. Admiral, this concept has been opposed by both the ex-
treme right and the extreme left. Some of the extreme right seem to
think that this Academy might fall into the wrong hands, and some of
the extreme left apparently think that this might be too bold a step.
I would like for you to comment on that rather strange opposition
coming from those two quarters.
Admiral Burke. Well, that is not unnatural, sir, because the far
left and the far right have very many similar characteristics. They
are convinced that their extreme views are absolutely correct and
they listen to nothing that doesn't accord with their views.
And this is true with both sides. Now there is a possibility, of course,
that the Communists will try to subvert this place. They certainly
will try. They will try to get people in, both as instructors and as stu-
dents. There will be heavy attacks on this Academy — not seemingly
stemming from the Communists, but still against the Academy, to
soften its curriculum, to change its curriculum, all sorts of things.
So it is possible, of course, that this Academy can be taken over
either by a Communist group or by people who advocate that all we
need to do is to just stand fast on everything.
There is that possibility, but it is not more great a danger than in
any other institution being taken over by a group of people who would
really work to destroy the effectiveness of the institution, and that.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1437
as I understand it, is why you have established, or why this bill estab-
lishes, a Committee to help the Commission to make certain that this
institution is run in accordance with the intent of Congress, and not
to get distorted and not to be taken over.
I don't think there is a very great chance of it, if you have a Commit-
tee that is active and knowledgeable and works at the job and if the
Congress itself continues to take an interest in it.
Mr. IcHORD. Do you have any further questions ?
Mr. JoHANSEN. What would be your feeling as to either represen-
tation of the Congress on this Committee or some type of oversight
relation on the part of Congress for the Commission ?
Admiral Burke. Well, Mr, Johansen, first, I would not have a
Committee that is composed solely of Congressmen. The reason for
that is that Congressmen are very busy. You have very many jobs
and you can't tend to all of these jobs now and, in many of them,
you have got to make choices as to which is most important to do, and
some of them you have got to let go and rely on somebody else advising
you what to do, and you follow his advice pretty blindly, sometimes,
and that is necessary,
Mr. Johansen. The Admiral has a very discerning knowledge of
the problems of Congress, I will say.
Admiral Burke. I have been on the other end of it a pretty long
time, sir. But a Congressman wouldn't have time enough to study the
problems thoroughly enough if the board were composed solely of
Congressmen. But several Congressmen on such a board would be
very good, perhaps a couple of Senators and a couple of Congressmen,
who could devote some time to it and who could know the rest of the
Committee and know who is expert, on this particular aspect and who is
not, and who not only know the Committee, but the Commission, I
think it would be a good thing. Also, it would show that the Con-
gress does have a great interest in this.
Mr. IcHORD. The proposed legislation establishes an independent
Commission, consisting of six members and a chairman, and then an
Advisory Committee consisting of State Department; Defense De-
partment; Health, Education, and Welfare; Central Intelligence
Agency ; and other agencies of the Government. Do you think, then,
that that is a pretty good way to handle that problem ?
Admiral Burke. Tliat is sound, sir. I think it would be helpful,
perhaps, if some Congressmen were on it, and perhaps people who
were not directly connected with the Government, It might, I don't
think that is nearly so important as having two to four Congressmen
on it,
Mr, IciiORD, Of course, the Congress will have control of it, through
the appropriation process. They will have to come before the Con-
gress each year to get their appropriation.
Admiral Burke. Yes, sir; but once a year is not going to be often
enough, I am afraid. I think the Committee is going to have to have
intimate knowledge of this whole institution, not to interfere with
the management of it, but just like a board of directors in a com-
mercial concern, to know what happens.
1438 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
Quite a few commercial concerns have gotten themselves into seri-
ous trouble when things happened that were done by the management
which the board of directors did not know about, and finally the
company finds itself in extremis, and then the board of directors has
to step in fast and learn very fast and take very drastic action, usually
cleaning out the old management and putting in new management.
This is something that is avoided when the board of directors knows
what is going on, but still keeps itself out of any direct management.
Mr. IcHORD. You feel, then, that Congress should be represented on
this Advisory Committee ?
Admiral Burkiq. Yes, sir; I think it would be advisable.
Mr. IcHORD. Both from the House and the Senate ?
Admiral Burke. Yes, sir ; I don't think it is necessary. I think it
would be advisable.
(At this point Mr. Pool left the hearing room.)
Mr. ScHADEBERG. I have no further questions.
Mr. IcHORD. Any further questions ?
Mr. JoHANSEN. Nothing further.
Mr. IcHORD. Well, Admiral, on behalf of the committee, I want to
thank you for your appearance before the committee today. All
Americans, of course, are aware of your great and your tremendous
service to your country. I was talking to you prior to the committee
meeting, and I am very happy to hear as an American that you are
still offering your very competent and devoted service to your country.
Admiral Burke. Thank you very much, Mr. Ichord.
Mr. JoHANSEN. I want to associate myself with the chairman's state-
ment, just 100 percent.
Adiniral Burke. Thank you, Mr. Johansen.
Mr. Johansen. Very nice to have you, sir.
Admiral Burke. Thank you, sir.
(The material submitted by Admiral Biirke follows :)
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1439
[New York Times, Mar. 31, 1964, pp. 1, 15}
Vietnam Starting to Train
Men to Govern Districts
Forty Officers Begin Course to Learn
How to Keep Recaptured Areas —
Lodge Praises People's 'Servants'
By PETER GROSE
Special to The New York Times
SAIGON, South Vietnam,
March 30 — The South Viet-
namese Government started to-
day an emergency training pro-
gram for young army officers
who have the task of bringing
effective government to the
people of the villages.
Special courses for the coun-
try's district chiefs marked an
important first step in Maj.
Gen. Nguyen Khanh's "clear
and hold" program to wipe out
Communist in.surgcncy.
Strongly endor.scd by Secre-
tary of Defense Robert S. Mc-
Namara in his recent visit, the
sti-ategy calls for efficient ad-
ministrators in the areas cleared
of guerrillas by military action.
"You are the 'hold' in 'clear
and hold," Ambassador Henry
Cabot Lodge told the opening-
day classes.
The Ambassador addressed
40 military district chiefs who
will attend the two-week
course.
"You epitomize the idea of
government as the sei-vant of
the people," Ambassador Lodge
said. "The old idea of the arro-
gant official, looking down on
the people, is a thing of the
past. You should be trusted and
loved.
"After the enemy have been
driven out, it is up to you
to govern the community with
the help of the local militia so
that the Vietcong won't come
right back.'*
In Vietnamese governmental
structure, the country's 237 dis-
tricts constitute the first level
of the central government above
the village level. For military
reasons, the district chiefs are
army officers from lieutenant to
major who may have had no ex-
perience in civilian administra-
tion.
The training prrgram in-
cludes courses in the conduct
of local elections, finance and
accounting, district economic
and social development and local
political activity.
A major recommendation
made by Secretary McNamara
in his report to President John-
son was that the local govern-
ment administration should be
strengthened to make the cen-
tral authority more real and
beneficial to the people of the
Vietnamese countryside. In
many parts of the country now
it is Vietcong gucn illa.s thai
1440 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
seem to be the government with
the Saigon forces and represen-
tatives the intruders.
Ambassador Lodge told the as-
sembled district chiefs, "It is
up to you to create a civilized
human community where the
people have security and can
sleep at night, where their chil-
dren can be educated, where
their health can be cared for,
where they are kept informed,
where they can own their own
land.
"It is up to you to bring about
the social revolution which the
people want. Do not let the
Communists bring about the so-
cial revolution. You must do it."
To Be Repeated for All
The training program, being
given at Saigon's National In-
stitute of Administration, is to
be repeated at monthly intervals
until all country's district chiefs
have passed through.
Under consideration for three
months, the training plan was
given Impetus by Premier
Khanh's national pacification
plan and the McNamara visit.
Similar training will also be
given to 800 graduates of South
Vietnam's Resei-ve Officers'
Training School, thereby supply-
ing a pool from which future
district chiefs may be chosen.
A third step taken by Pre-
mier Khanh to bolster the dis-
trict administration is assign-
ment of an entire graduating
class from the National Insti-
tute of Administration — about
70 — to jobs as deputy district
chiefs.
After their three-year course:
in the national institute, thi
graduates should be able tc
handle most of civil admini
stration in difficult districts
freeing the district chiefs fq
more specific military respon
slbilities.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1441
[From the Washington Post, May 16, 1964, p. A-l]
IJ,S, to Rush Training
Of Viet Administrators
By John Maffie
The Washington Post Foreign Service
SAIGON, May 15— The first
group of 15 South Vietnamese
will begin training next month
in the United 'States and Can-
ada in an effort to meet the
desperate shortage of civil ad-
ministrators in rural Viet-Nam.
I The introductory part of the
3V2-month, course — taught in
iPrench — will be offered in
Washington's U.S. Agency for
Inter national Development
JGenter stai*|,ing in mid-June.
Then the group will take field
training in French-speaking
communities in northern New
England and in the province
of Quebec, which Is 85 per
cent French-speaking.
The course was planned
months ago by AID. It was ex-
pedited following the just-
ended visit of Secretary of De-
fense Robert S. McNamara,
after critical reports that the
rural pacification plan was
bogging down because of cha-
atic administration and short-
ages of trained personnel.
Usually, U.S. -bound trainees
are given English training be-
fore departure but because of
the uigcncy this was bypassed.
Candidates are mostly dep-
uty provincial chiefs of admin,
istration with some experience
under the bygone French colo-
nial regime.
French remains the ma.jor
European language of this
group, although English is
growing in importance among
yd'unger officials!
It is expected that two other
groups of 15 will follow the
first in what sources admitted
was a "crash program."
One senior Vietnamese offi-
cial acknowledged recently
that "90 per cent of the local
administrators do, not know
how to do their jobs."
Training also h a.s been
stepped up at Saigon's Na-
tional institute of Administra-
tion to produce officials com-
petent in the basics .pi village
administration. It js hoped
that over 100,000 will be
trained at the lower echelons
this year.,
One official said the objec-
tive is shirtsleeve workers ca:
palple o{ 463ling with local
probleiTfis I'^ther than "white-
coated Saigon bureaucrats
who talk at people instead of
with them."
1442 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
[From Austritlian Army |ournal. No. I 76, January 1964, pp. 12-18]
POPULATION
CONTROL TECHNIQUES
OF
COMMUNIST INSURGENTS
A SOCIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS
Franklin Mark Osanka
Copyright reserved by the Author.
It is now
generally recognised that gueril-
las cannot operate nor exist for
long without the active support
of a small portion of the popula-
tion and the passive indifference
of a large portion of the popula-
tion. It Is also recognised that
the guerillas actually represent
only a small segment of the in-
surgents. The larger segment
consists of a covert underground
apparatus within the civilian
population. In brief, the guerillas
carry out overt actions on the
basis of timely intelligence in-
formation from the population
about the movements of govern-
ment forces. The population fur-
ther aids the guerillas by pro-
viding food, shelter, medical
care, labour and recruits. Most
importantly, the population
imder insurgent control denies
information to the counter-
insurgency forces concerning the
hideouts of the guerillas and the
identities of underground ap-
paratus personnel within the
population.
The purpose of this paper is to
examine some of the control
measures employed at the village
level by Communist insurgents
to ensure population loyalty
during the pre-guerilla and
early-guerilla stages of in-
surgency. This paper does not
pretend to cover all the factors
involved nor does it address itself
to any specific past or current
insurgency. However, it should
be noted that it is the author's
contention that Chinese-Com-
munist-style insurgency is the
archtype for most insurgencies
in the under-developed areas of
the world, and that insurgency
is the principal export item of
Red China.
Insurgent's
Operational Environment
It is dangerous to generalise
about geographic areas, but it is
now commonly recognised that
most rural areas of the under-
developed nations manifest cer-
tain environmental character-
istics which insurgents can ex-
Copyrtght (g) Franklin Mark Osanka 1964.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1443
ploit in order to achieve their their lives and who are fre-
own ends. In many of these rural quently exploited by the land
areas, living conditions are owners. They are often mis-
intolerable: illiteracy, disease, treated by the representatives of
hunger, poverty, inadequate the government that they en-
housing, a low crude-birth rate, counter (e.g., security forces and
a high early death rate, definite tax collectors) and as a result
levels of social stratification, and are extremely suspicious of all
tribal animosities are the rule strangers. Probably their great-
rather than the exception. The est desire is to own their own
peasants are usually a simple land.
people, primarily farmers, who They are politically unsophis-
do not own the land they (as ticated an^ their opinions and
have "probably their fathers attitudes are formed on the basis
before them) have worked all of what they see and hear in
Franklin Mark Osanka, Special Warfare Consultant,
Naval Ordnance Test Station, China Lake, California,
holds both a B.S. in Ed., and M.A. in Sociology /Anthropology
from Northern Illinois University. He has held several U.S.
university positions. He served with the U.S. Marine Corps
special "Force Recon" companies. For the last ten years he
has been actively engaged in both research and operational
aspects of special warfare. His formal special warfare train-
ing includes completing the U.S. Army's "Airborne and Jump
Master", "Special Forces Officers' ", and "Counter -insurgency
; Officers' " courses, the U.S. Navy's "SCUBA" school, the U.S.
Marine Corps' "Communist Guerilla Warfare" and "Am-
phibious Reconnaissance" courses, the U.S. Information
Agency's "Counter-insurgency" orientation, and U.S. Air
Force Air University "Counter -insurgency" courses. He has
served as a lecturer and/or consultant for most of these as
well as many other civilian and military schools and agencies.
His written works have appeared in both military and
civilian publication. His book. Modern Guerilla Warfare,
(reviewed in Australian Army Journal, July 1962),
is considered to be the international standard text and
; reference work on the subject. He is currently working on a
! manuscript entitled "Revolutionary Guerilla Warfare" which
will be published in the new International Encyclopaedia Of
The Social Sciences.
; This study is based on the author's analysis of unclas-
sified documents and diaries captured during the Chinese
Civil War, the French Indo-China War, the current struggle
in Viet-Nam, and discussions with veterans of these three
conflicts.
1444 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
o
<
ui
z
Q
UI
M
z
<
UJ
X
6
cr
o
<
UJ
y—
>-
t- tn
^'t^
fc'^
a: ^
a: bJ
•^n
31
cc t-
IUZj
>t-
~> T
o<->
o A
»—
en
w
■5^
•15
^'^
^
1
o
1
^
Ul
1
vc
UI
(Y
:d
u.
O
a
n
UJ
o
n
tr
<
^
55!
tn
in
a.
(X.
fO
UI
u
V
o
—J
_i
(Ll
3
UJ
n
>
n
<
-)
rr
<_)
en
t—
>-U1
^Ul
z
UI '
o
<
-5
^!3
<UJ
Q. o
1 '.
0)
vo
^
c
■^
,
c
o
i.
<u
01
N
o
(-
1-
o
w
?
c
o
«
iX
c
10
o
c~
«>
Ol
o.
t-
T
01
10
JZ
c
^
M
c
D
E
E
o
a
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1445
their own immediate area rather
than being influenced by ma^s
media. 1 Communications from
the ruling class (which is tradi-
tionally locat'jd in the urban
areas) is usually poor at best.
The ruling powers seldom view
the peasants as an important or
powerful political threat. Insur-
gents, and particularly Com-
munist insurgents, take the
opposite view!
The Insurgent Organisers
Long before the first insur-
gency shot is heard, Communist
Insurgent Organisers (hereafter
mentioned as Organisers), infil-
trate the sparsely populated
regions of the target country.
These men are natives of the
target country and very often
were born in or near the area
they have been assigned to con-
trol. They speak the local dialect,
are of the same ethnic origin,
and blend easily into the popula-
tion.
The organisers have had at
least three years of intensive
revolutionary training in a com-
munist country with heavy em-
phasis on the political-military
doctrine as expressed in Selected
Works by Mao Tse-tung.= Al-
though the organisers are dog-
matic in purpose, they are ex-
tremely practical and flexible
operationally. They realise that
each target area has its own
social dynamics and that they
must adapt their methods ac-
cording to the norms, folkways
and mores of the region. They
are hard-cored communists who
sincerely believe that their creed
is just.
They believe, as do their
Chinese Communist mentors.
30-471 O— 64— pt. 2 14
that thought determines action.
Therefore, if one can control
the thoughts of people, one can
dictate the actions of the people.
Their mission is to establish an
effective underground apparatus,
and they are prepared to die
rather than fail. Their method of
area penetration will follow
three phases: identification,
propagation, organisation.
Identification Pliase
A team of two organisers enters
a village and requests an
audience with the village leader.
The organisers are very polite
and humble men. They say, "We
have come to tell you of the
things that we have seen. But
first, as we can see that it is
harvest time, we would like to
help you gather in your life-
sustaining crops. We shall have
plenty of time to talk later." The
organisers labour in the field and
continually talk to the villagers,
In the evening, the organisers
entertain the villagers with folk-
songs and stories of the wonder-
ful countries they have seen.
Countries where "everyone" owns
land; all farmers have a good
mule and a fine house; where
children wear fine clothes and go
to fine schools and live a long
life; where no one is ever
hungry because the people work
together for the benefit of all;
and where the government's
function is to serve the people.
The organisers never mention
communism nor the pending in-
surgency. Political terminology
* For an iUuminating view of one peasant's
outlook see: Pierre Marchant. "A Colum-
bian Peon Tells His Moving Story",
Realities, September 1962, pp. 65-68.
* The Ave volumes are published in the
United States by International Publishers,
New York. 1954.
1446 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
is avoided, "plain talk" is the
vogue. The organiscM's' songs,
folk-tales, and conversations are
always designed to have some
meaning to the immediate lives
of the villagers. The objectives
of the identification phase are
to: establish rapport by identify-
ing with the lives of the vil-
lagers; determine the basic needs
and aspirations of the villagers;
discover the weaknesses of the
social norms that dictate the
accepted reaction to problems;
and slowly plant the seeds of
rebellion.
Propagation Phase
The propagation process is
both destructive and construc-
tive in nature. Destructively, the
organisers must aggravate all
the existing social ills and raise
them to the surface, then trans-
fer the cause of the ills to the
existing government. Construc-
tively, the organisers must con-
vince the villagers that through
co-operation, united action, and
loyalty to "each other, all social
ills can be eliminated and
individual aspirations can be
realised. Sociologically, the pro-
cess is one of inducing an aware-
ness of definite in-group/out-
group relationships, the in-group
being the people and the out-
group being the government. The
organisers know that stories of
the corruptness of the ruling
group in the capital city will
have little impression on the
villagers. In many cases the vil-
lagers do not realise there is a
capital city, much less an
established government. To
establish credibility and mean-
ing to their propaganda theme,
that government is the source of
all social ills, the organisers most ';
often use the indirect approach. [
The organisers' propaganda as
transmitted in folk-tales, songs,
and conversations all has the
same general theme: "the rich
get richer while the poor get
poorer." For example, a conver-
sation with a tenant farmer
might sound like this: "You have
been working this same plot of
land for 20 years. Before you,
your father worked it and before
him, his father worked it. And
what, my friend, do you have to
show for an accumulated 70
years of sweat and labour? Of
the seven children you have
created, four died at birth, two
never lived to enjoy their second
birthday, and one has survived
to do what you, your father, and
his father have done — sweat
and labour so that the landlord
can live in comfort in his fine
house and watch his healthy
children grow up to exploit your
son. Is that right? Is that just?
The answer, of course, is that it
is not just. Did God create some
men to live in comfort by the
sweat of other men? The answer
is no! How then has it occurred
that a small minority of men can
legally exploit the larger
majority of men? The answer is
organisation. Many years ago, a
small group of men discovered
that by working together and co-
operating with each other, they
could enjoy the fruits of the
peoples' labour. Using various
devious methods, they acquired
all of the land. They knew that
in order to rule they would need
a permanent police force and an
army, otherwise the people would
take back the land. So you see,
my friend, your landlord is the
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1447
grandson of one of these men
who originally stole the land. He
is able to exploit your labours
because he has organised a police
force and an army in order to
suppress the peoples' ability to
acquire what is justly theirs
anyway.
"How then can the people
attain what is legally and
morally theirs? The answer, my
friend, is organisation. The
minority can exploit the majority
because they are organised. Does
it nol follow then that if the
people who are the majority
organise, they will be stronger
than the minority landlords? All
over this country, the people are
beginning to organise. Men like
yourself are preparing to acquire
what is justly theirs. These men
know that some will die but they
say, 'Is it not better to die quickly
and honourably for one's rights
than to suffer a living slow death
at the hands of the exploiters?' "
Perhaps Roucek best sums up
the propagation phase when he
writes, "At the core of their
activities lies the argument that
the . . . oppressor has no legal
or moral right to exercise power
. . . and that the members and
leaders of the secret societies are
the expression of the 'legal' will
of the . . . people. The leaders
must generate in their followers
a readiness to die and a proclivity
for united action."^
Organisation Phase
Once three villagers have been
won over, the organisers can
establish the first cell of the
underground organisation within
the village. As more recruits join
the organisers, they are sent off
to previously established training
camps. Here their training is
75% ideological and 25% mili-
tary. Most of these individuals
return to their village and form
the nucleus of the underground
apparatus, and can serve as a
reserve force for the guerillas.
Others receive further military
training and later form into
small bands which will establish
camps in rugged areas near the
village. A few receive further
ideological training and serve as
assistant organisers to penetrate
other villages in the area. One
or two will be sent to a com-
munist country for a year and
undergo intensified ideological
and military training.
The organisers encourage and
direct the establishment of a
village medical clinic as well as
an elementary school. A variety
of civic activities are performed
by the underground organisation.
The organisers' purpose here is
to enhance village solidarity
behind the insurgents. Tactically,
the village medical clinic will
prove useful once the guerilla
stage of the insurgency is under
way. Psychologically, the school
provides the organisers an ad-
ditional opportunity to propa-
gandise the young. If the
government troops, in an
effort to weaken the insurgents'
organisation, requisition the
medicines of the clinic and out-
law the school, the insurgents
have won a psychological victory.
The orgarysers can attribute the
government's action to a desire
to suppress the people by keeping
them ignorant and weak with
' Joseph S. Roucek. "Sociology of Secret
Societies", The American Jouma/ of
Economics and Sociology, Vol. 19, No. 2,
January 1960, p. 164.
1448 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
diseases. The organisers' propa-
ganda theme will be, "the
government knows that an
educated and healthy people
cannot be exploited!"
lasurgency Population Control
The successful completion of
the identification, propagation,
and organisation phases at the
village level, results in four
principal conditions of control.
They are: in-group loyalty, in-
surgent terror tactics, personal
commitment, and government
terror tactics.
The in-group loyalty condition
is the result of. acceptance by
the majority of the villagers, of
the idea that the insurgent
activities are just and that the
government is unjust. Insurgent
terror tactics are directly related
to the in-group loyalty condition.
Those who aid the enemy are
traitors and harmful to the
people and, therefore, must be
eliminated. The penalty for
, traitors, while not often quick, is
final. Here, the in-group loyalty
condition is reinforced by the
underground's spy system which
keeps the organisers informed of
everything that is happening in
the village.
Personal commitment is
probably the most effective
condition of control. The or-
ganisers make every effort to
involve in one way or another,
a member of every family. Con-
sequently, families are reluctant
to betray the insurgency thereby
directly or indirectly increasing
the possibility of prison, and
most likely death, for a member
of their family. The personal
commitment condition is also
operating in those individuals
who have made large contribu-
tions to the insurgency and
expect to be rewarded when the
insurgents win.
Being unable to locate and
annihilate the guerilla forces,
many governments have resorted
to terroristic methods in an
attempt to secure the support of
the population. Government
terror tactics such as burning
villages, slaughtering innocent
people, and generally mistreating
the population, are well-
documented in the annals of
guerilla warfare history. It is
equally well documented that
such tactics tend to reinforce
the solidarity of the people
behind the insurgents. The
communist insurgents are well
aware of the population's reac-
tion to such action and very
often provoke the government
into committing drastic actions.
Indeed, one noted specialist
maintains that, "the greatest
contribution of guerillas and
saboteurs lies in catalysing and
intensifying counter - terror
which further alienates the
government from the local
population. "^
Conclusion
What has been discussed
occurs during the pre-violence
stage and the early stage of
guerilla action in an insurgency.
As the insurgency escalates into
country-wide guerilla warfare,
and later regular warfare, new
population control conditions are
born. These new conditions can
be favourable to either the insur-
• J. K. Zawodny. "Unconventional Warfare",
The American Scholar, Vol. 31, No. 3,
Summer 1%2. p. 292.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1449
gents or counter - insurgents,
depending primarily upon the
actions and attitudes of the
counter - insurgents. If the
counter-insurgents react to the
wide-spread guerilla violence
solely with traditional military
and police repressive measures,
they will simply reinforce the
validity of the insurgent propa-
ganda and insure continual
population support to the insur-
gents. If, on the other hand, the
counter-insurgents incorporate
into their pacification pro-
gramme at the village level, the
"psychological action", "civic
action", and "population secu-
rity" principles pioneered pri-
marily by the U.S. Army's Civil
Affairs and Special Warfare
Schools, they will destroy the
very foundation on which the
insurgency rests. For it is only
when the counter - insurgents
demonstrate by attitude and
action their desire and ability to
eliminate the basic social ills and
legitimate personal grievances,
as well as to protect the people
from the insurgents, will the
population transfer its loyalty.
As the insurgents lose the sup-
port of the population, they will
be forced to depend solely upon
increased terroristic methods of
population control and then it is
only a matter of time before the
insurgents are either eliminated
or rendered ineffectual.
When the immediate threat of
the insurgency is eliminated, and
a positive "nation - building"
programme is implemented, the
country can be on its way to a
state of socio-political stability
which greatly reduces, the pos-
sibility of the recurrence of in-
surgency.
F.M.Osanka,503A Saratoga, China Lake, California
Col. E.G.Keogh, Editor, AUSTRALIAN ARMY JOURNAL, Army Head'
qy^arters , Alberjj Park Barracks, Melbourne, Australia
Major Jim Ewan (The Black Watch), was back in peace-time
Scotland applying for the job of Recruiting Officer in Dundee. He was
called to Highland House in Perth for intervie>\ by the GOC Highland
District — General Colvillc at the time. "No>v, Jim," said the General,
"if I were to come as a potential recruit into your Dundee ofTicc and
say I wanted to join the Scaforths — what would you do?"
"I'd say 'Right laddie, I'll fix you up'," replied Jim.
"But remember Jim," the General went on, "you are in Dundee
and in the heart of The Black Watch recruiting area."
"Ay sir — but I'd still do as he asked."
"Why that?" said the General scarchingly.
"I didna like his face," came the reply.
— From ^'The Red Hackle"
1450 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
Mr. IcHORD. The next, witness to be heard is our colleague, the dis-
tinguished gentleman from Virginia, Congressman John Marsh.
Congressman Marsh, the committee is very happy to have you ap-
pear before our committee in the interests of this legislation. I know
that you have a very great interest in the Freedom Academy, and we
will be very glad to hear you at this time.
STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN 0. MARSH, JR., U.S. REPRESENTATIVE
FROM VIRGINIA
Mr. Marsh. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate
the opportunity to be here and appear in support of the legislation
envisioned along the lines of the Freedom Academy bill. I have a
statement, if I might read it.
As we move rapidly through the last half of the 20th century, the
present decade takes on ominous proportions. Truly a decade of
challenge, it is even more a decade of decision. The die for the
image of society when we close the second millennium might well
be cast in the sixties.
Caught up in the revolutionary times in which we live, America
has yet to bring to bear the full resources of its society to the prob-
lems of a changing world. Far surpassing the early patriot's dream
in either its material wealth or institutions of freedom, America
seems at times to be swept along in the currents of a changing world
rather than directing them. Yet, we are the true revolutionaries.
Communism is reactionary — not revolutionary. It is feudalism at
its worst. The feudal lord was master of all he could rule or defend
with the sword, and within that domain his will was law. To him
belonged man's labor and its fruits. Today in the Sino- Soviet em-
pire we find not a change in the system, but in the methods of opera-
tion. Scientific and technological advances in communications and
weaponry have for the feudal lord's counterpart in the Kremlin
extended the domain — the present-day fiefs, Hungary, Poland, are
simply larger.
If there is anything revolutionary in communism, it is the man-
ner in which is waged a total conflict — militarily, economically,
psychologically, and politically in a never-ending struggle to enslave
man. Through careful coordinated control by brute force and terror
of the governmental, economic, and social resources of a nation, the
regime is able to launch its devastating thrusts. A coordinated
thrust must be met by a coordinated response, and in this we have
largely failed. Particularly when the thrust comes in an area of
our society that is beyond the scope of governmental endeavor. The
dynamics of American society thus far has not included the mechanics
to incorporate into national strategy the skills, talents, and abilities
of our citizens, as well as our economic wealth, to defend, perpetuate,
and enlarge our way of life.
Within the broad framework of American institutions, we must
formulate new strategic concepts based on a voluntary cooperative
effort between governmental and nongovernmental areas. The
proper effort must combine leadership and local action. At the
higher levels of society there must be the type of leadership that
not only will cause our people to shake off apathy and complacency,
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1451
but will insure their efforts are properly directed. Also, in policy
echelons, particularly governmental, there must be greater receptivity
to local ideas originating eithei within or without the governmental
structure — a willingness to experiment in a search for new ap-
proaches. Frequently, there is a tendency on the part of individuals
in the power structure of any organization, because of experience,
better sources of information, and technical knowledge, to treat
rather lightly effort originating either at a lower level in the struc-
ture or outside the structure entirely.
The most priceless thing that we can give our country and mankind
in this decade is our time, our skill, our energy, our talents. Not
only do these next few fateful years require it — but duty demands it.
This contribution to the national effort must not be limited to only a
few people, but must give an opportunity to incorporate into such
effort the vast skills and talents available in our society in the private
sector.
What are some of the broad purposes that might be accomplished in
the national effort by an institution such as you are considering today ?
To list some, I would set out :
1. To provide better coordination and communication between the
public and the private sector to meet the challenges of the cold war.
2. To better utilize in the national effort the skill, talents, and re-
sources of a free citizenry.
3. To encourage private cooperative endeavor in the national
defense.
4. To create a new dimension in the strategy of a free people.
As i view the establishment of such an institution, I am not think-
ing in terms of an Academy in the nature of one of our service acad-
emies, but rather of a training institution whose student body would
be composed principally of individuals who have already completed
certain educational requirements and who now occupy positions of
authority and responsibility who might be able to implement into
those positions new insights derived from the training they might
receive.
I might point out that an objection made to the Freedom Academy
is that such an institute should be limited to the governmental sector,
rather than the private sector, because of the use of classified materials,
intelligence reports, and related data. However, a great deal of the
type of material that I would envision to be considered at such an
institute i? predominantly unclassified.
The writings of Marx,'Lenin, Mao, and analyses of them, are clearly
in the purview of unclassified documents. Many case studies of the
methods of operation of the Communist apparatus are matters of
current events and historical record which can be gleaned by the care-
ful reader or listener from radio, news, and other sources of public
information.
Many of the lecturers at such institutions as the National War
College, the Army War College, the Foreign Service Institute, and
other centers of learning are recognized scholars in the field of na-
tional security. The books, articles, and other treatises of these in-
dividuals have been widely published and disseminated at home and
abroad. Their subjects cover the entire spectrum of the cold war
conflict which some have described as the "protracted conflict."
1452 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSIOIST
The pronouncements and statements of such individuals as Khru-
shchev, Kadar, Gomulka, and Mao, as well as Tass dispatches and such
publications as Pravda and Izvestia^ are not only unclassified but are
available to the free world.
Finally, in summary, in appearing here in support of legislation of
this type, I think it is well to point out the broad spectrum of support
that it enjoys on the domestic political scene, with sponsors and spokes-
men who represent a broad cross section of American political and eco-
nomic thought. Individuals who on the domestic scene are frequently
at loggerheads on national domestic policy have joined ranks without
regard to the arbitrary classification of "conservative" or "liberal" be-
cause of their recognition of a problem that must be met in a nonparti-
san sense in what is really a search for common ground. There is a
need to search for this common ground in our efforts to come to grips
with the problems that confront us in a changing world and the tlireat
that is posed to the institutions of this Republic by the ideology and
aggressive actions of the Communist states.
In the final analysis, notwithstanding our differences, the things
which unite us are far greater than the things which divide us.
That concludes the written statement.
Mr. IcHORD. Thank you. Congressman Marsh.
Mr. Johansen?
Mr. Johansen. I appreciate having your statement very much. I
understand you have a constituent here, a counsel of this committee,
Mr. Ta vernier.
Mr. Marsh. He is one of the most distinguished constituents not
only in the 7th District, but indeed, in our State of Virginia.
Mr. Johansen. I congratulate you on your constituent, and he on
his Representative.
Mr. Marsh. I think that I am benefited more by my associations
with him than he by his associations with me.
Mr. Johansen. I will stay neutral on that issue.
Mr. IcHORD. Mr. Schadeberg, do you have some questions ?
Mr. Schadeberg. I just want to state that I appreciate the fact that
you have taken the time to come and testify. I appreciate having you
here.
Mr. Marsh. I appreciate the opportunity, sir.
Mr. IcHORD. Mr. Marsh, I have one question. You were a little
hesitant about training private citizens along with the governmental
personnel, as I understand.
Mr. Marsh. I didn't mean to give that impression. I think that the
private sector must be incorporated into this effort. The point I was
trying to make is that in some previous testimony here in opposition to
this type of legislation the point has been made that you can't bring
the private sector in because of the use of classified materials, which I
do not think is a valid argument, because much of the subject matter
and the courses that would be taught would be taught from what are
substantially unclassified sources, either to governmental or to private
sector.
Mr. Iciiord. Well, the classes would be separated, or else the private
citizen could be approved for viewing classified material.
Mr. Marsh. Exactly. There could be certain subcourses or ad-
vanced courses or several separate hours of instruction for those that
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1453
enjoy sensitive positions in Government that they could attend, and
members of the private sector would not attend.
Probably in all events this information would not even he helpful on
a "need to know" basis to members from the private sector, but I think
the private sector is the area where we must do our greatest work, and
I think in the mechanics of training there are several precedents that
the committee might well look at in the field of management training.
For example, the very fine courses in the American Management
Association, which are designed to reach and train middle manage-
ment— and it is this middle management who are the people that we
need here, because they are in positions of policy and influence in the
private sector — in the corporations, and what has been done by the
American management in a series of seminars and training institutes,
it would seem to me, would offer certain guidelines.
Mr. IcHORD. It would also be very valuable to train private citizens
who are going overseas and have overseas business.
Mr. Marsh. Exactly. And high school teachers and others who
would be engaged in teaching. The American Bar Association has
made some great strides in this field of instruction in the high schools
on the difference between totalitarianism, as represented in the Soviet
State and, of course, the Chinese state, as compared with the demo-
cratic society, with institutions of government that are representative
of the Western World.
There is an excellent example in what has been done at the National
War College in the summer session, where individuals not in Govern-
ment and from "the private sector come in for a training program.
I would see that a beginning might well be perhaps the use of some
of these facilities during times that they are not being used, to begin
with a modest effort. I do not see the 4-year type of Academy, but
perhaps the use of other facilities that are now available during the
summertime and at other periods, as a beginning.
Mr. ScHADEBERG. Would you feel that the private sector also should
be included in the governing board of directors?
Mr, Marsh. I think that there are individuals in the private sector
that should be represented there. I think we have gone out on many
other governmental institutions and selected people from the private
sector to serve on commissions and boards. There are many people,
for example, Admiral Burke is now in the private sector, and he
would be an individual I think would be extremely well qualified to
serve on such a board.
Mr. ScHADEBERG. That is all.
Mr. IcHORD. Thank you very much. Congressman Marsh, I ap-
preciate your very valuable contribution to the committee.
The next witness is Mr, Paul Jones, Mr, Jones, it is a pleasure to
have you with us today. I might state for the record that Mr. Paul
Jones is a columnist for the Philadelphia E'vening Bulletin, a former
professor of history and a former emplovee of the Office of War In-
formation, He has spent some time in South Vietnam several years
ago and, at that time, did forecast some of the events that have since
taken place in South Vietnam.
I think, for the record, Mr, Jones, before you get into your testi-
mony, we would appreciate some elaboration upon your background.
1454 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
STATEMENT OF PAUL JONES
Mr. Jones. Well, actually, I was not with OWI. I was with the
Office of Inter- American Affairs, which performed the function of
OWI in Latin America. OWI did not operate in that area. I took
my three degrees at the University of Pennsylvania. I taught there
for 8 years and then I resigned to do magazine writing.
For the past 25 years, I have been a columnist and editorial writer
for the Philadelphia Evening Bulletin. In that capacity, I went out
to Saigon as an exchange journalist and lectured on journalism to
Vietnamese newspapermen. I speak French well enough to lecture in
French, and that was a prerequisite.
I have also worked as a correspondent in South America, in Chile
and Brazil, in almost every country in South America, and in Mexico.
My chief interest is in seeing something like the Freedom Academy
established for the private sector, particularly teachers and news-
papermen who get assignments abroad. My first experience abroad
was in Chile in 1941, which was just at the time when the popular
front, a Communist-Socialist-Radical coalition, was collapsing, and
I found it very difficult to understand just what the political picture
was within Chile.
Now I think it is fair to say that the Embassy and our own office,
the OIAA, and the various operational agencies there were only too
anxious to help, but they are busy people. They can't devote the tiiiie
to briefing thoroughly every newspaperman that comes into a
country. It seems to me that if a course of a month or 6 weeks, which
would bring together all the information, let us say, that this committee
and the Senate committee in the same area has amassed over more
than 25 years, if that could be concentrated and an idea given to the
newspapermen going abroad or to the teachers, particularly in this
country, that things are not always what they seem and that, let us say,
a cry for land reform doesn't necessarily mean merely a liberal or
an agrarian reformer. In other words, to give them some kind of
sophisticated attitude.
I think that to a large degree, the reports that we — and when I say
"we," I speak as a newspaperman who has worked abroad — ^that what
we send back has often a capital influence on public opinion, and fre-
quently, from the more remote areas, it is the only information that
comes. Knowing a great many of my colleagues, I haven't the slight-
est idea that they are infiltrated, or I don't deny that some of them
may be, but in the large degree, it is due to ignorance.
I don't mean that they are ignorant men in the sense of general
information, but they are ignorant of the sophisticated process of
Communist management in politics within the teachers' unions, within
the students' unions, within the labor unions, in government itself, in
politics, sometimes infiltrating even the church, in some of these areas.
Now this is my chief interest. Obviously, I am in the private sec-
tor, and we have made some mistakes. We made one very bad mis-
take in Cuba. I think we made, in my opinion, another very bad one
in Saigon, largely because the reporters who were out there weren't
sophisticated enough to go behind the outward appearances and pene-
trate to the actual inspirers of these movements.
Mr. JoHANSEN. May I interrupt?
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1455
Mr. Jones. Certainly.
Mr. JoHANSEN. WavSn't that also the case with regard to China and
the agrarian reformers ?
Mr. Jones. Yes, it certainly was.
Mr. JoHANSEN. A great deal of the so-called journalistic reporting
that came out of there ?
Mr. Jones. I agree. It was really a kind of naivete which made the
even perfectly honest reporters, with very few exceptions, take at
face value the statements of a Chou En-lai or around the press head-
quarters in Chungking. That is basically my point, of course, and in
this country, it is equally important, I think, for teachers to be aware
actually how these things operate.
For many years, I have read the printed hearings of this commit-
tee, for example, and the amount of information actually buried in
your publications is astounding, if it could only be brought together
and simply presented for the information of teachers, newspapermen,
businessmen, people who go abroad, even missionaries would benefit,
I think, in some cases, not by indoctrination, but by information. Just
as you have to take an anticholera shot, I think it is a good idea to
leam something about what you are bound to come up against.
Mr. IcHORD. What years were you in South Vietnam, sir?
Mr. Jones. I was there in 1959. There was bad trouble then, but
it really didn't begin to heat up until the beginning of 1961, or the
middle of 1961.
Mr. IcHORD. Well, what do you think the reporters could have done,
or should have been doing, or what did they do over there that could
have been improved upon ?
Mr. Jones. There were two classes of reports from Vietnam. Sai-
gon is not a very attractive post. It is not very easy to get in and
out of. Hence the veteran correspondents, some of whom, like Keyes
Beech and Margaret Higgins, had gone through Korea and, before
that, had been in China, were sophisticated enough not to take at
face value the idea that a simple Buddhist monk would have the bat-
tery of mimeograph machines and the facilities for public relations
that had never been seen in Vietnam before.
When they came down from Tokyo or Hong Kong, where they
made their base, their stories were not quite the same as those of the
young reporters who were in Saigon. That is, I would say. this: That
the experienced reporters who came in suggested more of what was
actually revealed by the printed testimony of the U.N. Commission,
the fact-finding commission that went out there to Vietnam. Of
course its report, came after the coup d'etat, but reading that testimony,
it seemed to me perfectly clear that it was a managed thing. I am
f ranklv imperfectly acquainted myself with this whole New Buddhism
operation of the Communists in the Far East. I am partially ac-
quainted with it, as far as I can get hold of the information, but it is
obvnously a very potent weapon.
Mr. IciioRD. Do you feel, then, that it would be very valuable for
all of the newspapers to send their war correspondents for training
such as this, to recognize ?
Mr. Jones. I think so. Of course, it would be on a voluntary basis,
but I would think that the i)ublishers or the heads of the organizations
involved would be only too glad to send their men, rather than just
1456 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
plunge them, without any background whatever, into very complex
situations in remote areas of the world — which, of course, is precisely
where the Communists are making their best time.
Mr. IcHORD. Do you have any further questions, Mr. Johansen ?
Mr. Johansen. I have no further questions, but I think you have
testified to a very practical potential value and a very practical need
for this type of institution.
Mr. Jones. I certainly think so.
Mr. IcHORD. Mr. Schadeberg ?
Mr. Schadeberg. Would you care to comment by saying that per-
haps the difference between the Freedom Academy as suggested to be set
up and the academy that would be set up in the State Department, the
National Academy of Foreign Affairs, is that one would address itself
to the pure facts and research and the other would apply to foreign
policy ?
Mr. Jones. Yes, I would say so. From reading the testimony, I am
aware that the State Department believes that they can cover this
through their Foreign Service Institute or Foreign Affairs Academy.
Certamly, speaking as a private citizen, I welcome the idea that State
would improve its own institute, as it seems to feel the need to do, but
I don't think that an operational agency like Stat© or CIA or USIA
or AID, that that is the proper place for a general Freedom Academy
open to the private citizen.
(At this point, Mr. Willis returned to the hearing room.)
Mr. Schadeberg. It wouldn't address itself to the same end. Thank
you.
That is all the questions I have, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. IcHORD. Do you feel, then, Mr. Jones, that the nature of the re-
porting that comes out of a given foreign country might be more in-
fluential upon the course of events than even some of the operations
of the State Department people?
Mr. Jones. That is entirely possible. In certain critical situations,
yes.
Mr. IcHORD. Thank you.
Mr. Johansen. Particularly, if I might interject, particularly when,
as evidently was the casCj State Department people were instructed to
get their background traming in regard to Cuba and Castro from the
newspapers.
Mr. Jones. Yes, that was a reversal. That is just the reverse of
what I had in mind.
The Chahjman (presiding). Thank you very much sir.
The committee will stand in recess until tomorrow morning at 10
a.m.
(Whereupon, at 11 :55 a.m., Tuesday, May 19, 1964, the committee
recessed, to reconvene at 10 a.m., Wednesday, May 20, 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. 11715, PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A
FREEDOM COMMISSION AND FREEDOM ACADEMY
Part 2
WEDNESDAY, MAY 20, 1964
United States House of Representatives,
Committee on Un-American Activities,
Washington^ B.C.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
The Committee on Un-American Activities met, pursuant to recess,
at 10:25 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 ; Richard H. Ichord, of Missouri ; August E. Johansen,
of Michigan; and Henry C. Schadeberg, of Wisconsin.
Staff members present: Francis J. McNamara, director; Frank S.
Tavenner, general counsel ; and Alfred M. Nittle, counsel.
Mr. Johansen (presiding) . The committee will come to order.
Today the Committee on Un-American Activities continues hear-
ings on eight bills which have been referred to it and which would
create a Freedom Commission and Freedom Academy. We are very
happy to welcome as the first witness this morning, our colleague
from California, Congressman D. H. Clausen.
Mr. Clausen, you may proceed as you wish.
STATEMENT OF HON. DON H. CLAUSEN, U.S. REPRESENTATIVE
FROM CALIFORNIA
Mr. Clausen. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I am pleased
to be able to appear before your committee on a subject that is of
great interest to myself, and I am sure to the Nation as well. It is
conceivable that these hearings will bring forth a program that could
change the tide of history.
Mr. Chairman, I welcome the opportunity to appear before your
committee in support of the Freedom Academy concept. Your com-
mittee is to be complimented for initiating these hearings in the in-
terest of developing interest and testimony on behalf of a program
urgently needed to combat the well-organized economic, political, and
ideological offensive of the Soviet Union and other advocates of the
Communist doctrine.
1457
1458 PROVIDENG FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
In my judgment, the salvation of our system of government, our
American way of life, the hopes of and aspirations of people through-
out the world who desire to be or remain free could rest on the de-
cision this committee makes with respect to this legislative recom-
mendation.
(At this point Mr. Willis entered the hearing room.)
Mr. Clausen. It is my personal opinion that the Freedom Academy
should be sponsored, staffed, and guided by the leadership of the pri-
vate sector of our system. Cooperation with the executive branch,
State Department and other agencies, is absolutely essential to main-
tain the necessary security provisions. However, I do believe the
Congress, the legislative branch, which is the most responsive to the
electorate, must establish full control of the program — offering the
necessary guarantee of liaison between Government and the private
sector. The Freedom Academy' must, at all times, have as its major
objective the full development and utilization of people familiar with
the workings of our private enterprise system.
Further, I want to recommend vigorously recognition of the vital
role cities, towns, counties, school districts, and special service district
organizations will play in offering a guideline to developing countries
throughout the world interested in the adoption of our Federal system.
Should the Freedom Academy and the Commission be established, I
would recommend early consultation with organizations such as we
have in California — the League of California Cities, the County Su-
pervisors Association of California — and other municipal organiza-
tions throughout the country. The National Association of County
Officials has an outstanding action program through their recentl}'
formed "Home Rule Congress." The overwhelming demand for
political stability requires our giving prompt attention to these impor-
tant factors. Additionally, we in the United States must strive to
retain the basic concept of our three levels (local, State, and Federal)
of government, assuring that each level has clearly defined areas of
responsibility and the available tax sources to meet demands for serv-
ice responsively and responsibly.
In the April 17 issue of Life magazine, Ambassador Henry Cabot
Lodge set forth, in a very forthright and provocative article, a detailed
analysis of the problems facing the United States in Vietnam. It is
timely, and I would recommend the article to anyone desirous of
factual information on the world's "hot spot." All Americans should
be familiar with the Ambassador's comments because Vietnam is the
only place in the world where Americans are under fire from Commu-
nist guns.
Mr. Lodge has offered some very significant points that I believe to
be worthy of note, and I quote :
South Vietnam is a Iteystone for all of Southeast Asia, the hub of an area which
is bounded on the northeast and east by Formosa and the Philippines, on the
south by Indonesia and on the west by Burma. Control of South Vietnam would
put the Communists squarely into the middle of Southeast Asia — whence they
could radiate all over.
The conquest of South Vietnam would immediately disturb Cambodia and
Laos, and bring strong repercussions farther west in Thailand and Burma. It
would shake Malaysia to the south. It would surely threaten Indonesia. Then, if
Indonesia were unable or unwilling to resist, the Chinese Communists would be
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1459
on the doorstep of Australia. Finally, eastward, the repercussions for the
Philippines and for Formosa would be severe.
Therefore, when we speak of Southeast Asia, we are not talking of some small
neck of the woods but of an area about 2,300 miles long from north to south and
3,000 miles wide from east to west — with about 240 million people.
Mr. Lodge continues :
There is vivid recognition that the Vietcong campaign is, above all, a political
affair; that we must organize for the political conflict as carefully as we have
organized for military success ; and that there must be a true civil-political
organization to go hand in hand with the military.
In this paragraph, I believe we have a briefly defined statement of
foreign policy recommendations that will be required now and long
into the future, as we continue the struggle between freedom and
communism. It is to this end that I shall address my remarks.
The cold war is not merely a confrontation between the U.S. and
the U.S.S.R., as Soviet propagandists would have the world believe.
It is a war between communism and every nation outside the Red
bloc. It is a war that must be fought by citizens of all nations of the
free world who desire to remain free.
The so-called cold war should be properly recognized as political
war. The battlefronts are many and varied and will continue to be so
as the Soviets create chaos and controversy in the many comers of
the world — most of which stem from the well-organized activities of
the nearly 300,000 trained subversive agents operating in the free
world. The arms race, the competition in space and trade, are all part
of the Marxist master plan. However, the political battlefronts are
the most serious, because they are the ones on which the Conmiunists
pin their greatest hopes for world domination.
Unfortunately, it is on the political fronts that they are the strongest
and we are the weakest.
On November 13 of last year, during the debate on the Peace Corps,
I submitted remarks which, in view of Mr. Lodge's comments, you
may find interesting. These remarks, I believe, Mr. Chairman, were
made a part of my February 18 testimony before this committee.
(See parti, p. 1032.)
During this past year, I have attended the regular State Depart-
ment briefings available to Members of Congress. I studied all
available material that I could get my hands on; I participated
in study groups with some of my colleagues; I interviewed and
exchanged ideas with people considered to be experts in their fields,
including diplomats, ambassadors, military men, international law-
yers, bankers, labor leaders, and economists, missionary volunteers,
as they returned from such stations as Laos, India, the Congo,
Borneo, Brazil, PeiTi, Mexico, Central America — to name a few.
With this background of information, I have joined some of my
colleagues in promoting the Freedom Academy concept — a concept
with a sole objective of winning the cold war— designed to take ad-
vantage of the unlimited material and human resources available in
the private sector. A plan that places more emphasis in the private
sector and less emphasis in the public sector — as we advance this
proven concept of foreign policy.
The United States Government, in its efforts to stem the Communist
tide, has poured billions of dollars annually in military, economic.
1460 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
and technical aid to foreign nations. Anyone who has followed inter-
national problems closely will immediatey conclude that the funda-
mental problem is a lack of political stability brought about primarily,
in my judgment, by inadequate systems of government. Compare any
of these to the system of government we have been able to enjoy under
this great ConsLitution of ours. A Federal system that provides a
maximum opportunity for political participation by its electorate — a
system that only functions at the will of the people or by consent
of the governed.
Without question, these nations' greatest need is political aid — we
must export knowledge and know-how in this vital field. This type
of political aid could be made available to the present and future
leaders of those nations who are currently living under the "umbrella"
of our military and economic security.
A Freedom Academy could train such leaders in techniques for
counteracting the propaganda of the Communists. These same leaders
could be trained on how to transmit knowledge in behalf of legitimate
constitutional government, freedom of thought, freedom of expression,
freedom of economic opportunity, the right to assemble peaceably, full
religious liberty, and other basics of the free society — as opposed to
the totalitarian state.
In California, much to our credit, the County Supervisors Associa-
tion has initiated an intern fellowship training prograjn, financed
through private capital, for young men interested in local government.
With local government being virtually nonexistent in many countries,
thereby restricting participation in a unit of government close to the
people, I would urgently recommend that this program be expanded
in our own country and further be included in the curriculum of the
Freedom Academy. Consultation with our city, county, and school dis-
trict organizations throughout this great Nation would provide a large
pool of information urgently needed in these developing nations.
As previously stated, in this rapidly changing world, a defense
posture by itself is not enough. Many of you in this room, I am sure,
are former athletes. Let me ask you, "How many ball games did you
win by devoting all of your time and attention to defense strategy?"
Let's face it, you didn't win unless you had a better offense.
The challenge to America and indeed the free world is really the
development of an ideological offensive of our own. Some of this is
already going on, but not enough.
In its endeavors to penetrate the West, the Soviet Union's hierarchy
is constantly preoccupied with strategems designed to exploit the con-
tradictions in Western society. This required the utilization of ele-
ments which, although non-Communist, are ideologically at odds with
the open society. These include the more doctrinaire Socialists, statist-
liberals, pacifists, extreme rightwing conservatives, and some of the
nationalists in underdeveloped countries.
A primary justification for large Soviet Embassies in many coun-
tries of the free world is the alleged possibility of Soviet trade. The
possibilities could be immense if trade with the Soviets were not
conducted by government monopoly and determined largely by politi-
cal consideration.
The Kremlin does not buy what the people need or want, but rather
what is essential from the point of view of building its power ma-
PROVIDING FOl? CREATIOX OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1461
chine, mostly industrial capital goods and essential raw materials.
As these needs are satisfied, trade declines. Thus, we have the phe-
nomenon that as the Soviet empire grows, the area under its juris-
diction is increasingly withdrawn from existing world trade.
Soviet trade and their tactics in political warfare is one of the chief
weapons in the arsenal. Their economic offensive is being felt in all
quarters of the world. The newspapers are filled with their activi-
ties— the most recent of which were Algeria and Egypt,
We, in America, must step up our offensive. The question arises —
How? Should the Government do this? In my judgment, the Gov-
ernment is the least equipped to carry out a successful program be-
cause of limitations placed on it.
Government-to-government programs have failed miserably in for-
eign aid. The major talents of this country lie in the private sector.
We must step up the people-to-people effort — an expansion designed
to promote the joint- venture concept between investors of our coun-
try and investors of interested developing nations.
"We must rededicate ourselves to capitalist principles. Private en-
terprise is substantially better qualified than Government to sell cap-
italism abroad. Acts, not words, will counter communism. Many of
our economic ideas and ideals can be exported.
One of our major problems is, of course, the problem of education.
Many of our schools of business and public administration can help.
The* Agricultural Extension Service, which has worked so success-
fully in this country, could be implemented as we work to raise their
educational facilities and their literacy rate.
The correspondence school idea should certainly be recommended
as a program to promote worldwide education.
The many great service clubs operating internationally, such as the
Rotary, Kiwanis, Lions, can and must expand their sphere of in-
fluence.
The Boy and Girl Scouts of America, the4^H Clubs and the various
church missionary volunteer programs are but a few of our great
voluntary organizations dedicated to the improvement of our fellow
man.
I spoke recently in Fort Worth, Texas, before the Junior Chamber
of Commerce. I observed the great effort over the weekend of the
Sonoma County Junior Chamber people in an outstanding commu-
nity promotional effort. These young men can change the world if
we have the program to properly channel their efforts.
There are four forms of American activity — cooperatives, small
business, trade unions, and voluntary agencies — that can hold the key
to solving the problem of how and what to communicate to others,
the things that brought America to its position of leadership and
greatness.
The cooperative, the nonprofit corporate association, as it is usecf
in North America, is something that fascinates overseas leaders. To
name a few of the corporations who provide service without entity
profit, but with profit to the members who use and own it^ — the Associ-
ated Press, Sunkist, Railway Express Agency, our larrce mutual in-
surance companies, credit" imion finance companies, and agricultural
purchasing associations, and so forth.
30-471— 64— pt. 2 15
1462 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
Small business is a facet of American life that is devastating to
the promoters of Soviet communism. The word "capitalism" is under
worldwide attack. The words "small business" are the end of the
rainbow for many millions of people. The fact that we, as a nation,
have recognized small businesses as a vital part of our economic life
and have shown governmental interest in them is revolutionary to the
thinking of those who have condemned America as being materialis-
tic and dominated by big business.
Nothing will appeal to people in distant lands more than to be
brought face to face with the fact that small business is a vital part
of America. We have an "atomic bomb" here in the world of ideas
that for some reason has never really l>een tried. Nothing is more
American than private small business.
Labor unions, through their free labor movement, have done a bet-
ter job of interpreting America overseas than has business.
Highly organized American labor is part and parcel of our present-
day capitalistic society. Our laborers are in many cases stockholders.
Together with business and agriculture, labor has made possible the
great revolution of the past 50 years, whereby we have achieved uni-
versal participation in capitalism by all segments of our society.
The fact is that they, as free trade unionists, believe enougli in our
system to fight for it. If the trade associations of the companies for
which labor works expand their interest in this international program,
we can turn the tide of history— this, we can and must do.
Voluntary agencies are as representative of American capitalism
as any other contemporaiy institution. There are hundreds of trade
associations here that might well apportion a part of their income
to send true businessmen abroad, without Government subsidy, to do
a better job of interpreting America.
There are many examples of voluntary agencies — from profit-entity
business, the supermarket organizations, nonprofit corporate associa-
tions, savings and loan associations, finance and managerial organiza-
tions are just a few examples of what can be done.
If just a few more organizations would light their own candles,
study the situation, and find where their members' particular talents
and resources fit, world tensions would be considerably eased.
Again quoting Ambassador Lodge:
We should also be sure that we are making full use of the things in which
we excel and in which the Communists are deficient. For example, we probably
cannot, as a general rule, surpass a young Oriental guerrilla fighter, who doesn't
mind the heat, who can get along on a daily handful of rice, and who can lie
under water for hours at a time breathing through a straw. But we can do
better in other things, such as : the use of airplanes, the art of medicine, im-
proved farming and education, the development of an energetic political system
based on justice.
I believe those last few recommendations, Mr. Chairman, are cer-
tainly to be considered as we develop this Freedom Academy concept.
I think they are fundamental, they are something that can work in
these foreign lands, and I have been in these areas and worked with
these very fundamentals in mind.
Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman, for letting me appear before
you.
The Chairman. We certainly are grateful to you, sir, for your
splendid presentation.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1463
Now I have just compared your bill, H.R. 10037, with the Boggs
and Taft bills, and I find that they are almost word for word identical ;
are they not ?
Mr. Clausen. Yes, Mr. Chairman. Wlien this was initially set up,
I wanted to join in this effort. In the matter of finance, however, it is
up to the committee, I think, to evaluate the testimony. I tend to lean
toward establishing the private- fhiance concept.
The Chairman. I understand. But I want to follow the structure
of 3'our bill.
Mr. Clausen. Yes.
The Chairman. It is exactly like the Taft bill and with one ex-
ception, identical to the Boggs bill.
Mr. Clausen. Yes. That is correct. And my reason for this, Mr.
Chairman — at the time that I introduced the bill, I visited with Mr.
Grant and some of the other fellows who had done substantial re-
search. I found no great difference in our mutual objectives. So I
used the same language suggested by these gentlemen to fulfill the
objectives. The only thing that I am concerned about, of course, is
how we would finance this. It is possible we will have to amend the
original bill as it applies to financing the program.
Some people have said that it can't be financed in the private sector.
I am personally not convinced that everything has been done that
could have been done, because I think that we have experienced great
change in our times. I think there is more emphasis and more con-
sideration being given to this concept now than in any previous time
in history, and I do know this, that the gentlemen who worked on
this legislation at the outset felt in their own minds that they would
rather have it financed through the private sector, so that they could
control it, but here again I am not concerned about the method of fin-
ance for the moment. I think we need to have a strong endorsement
of the concept, and then it is up to you gentlemen to decide where we
should place our emphasis on finance before the final draft of the
bill is voted on.
Tax incentives, however, could be a very important vehicle to pro-
mote the concept.
The Chairman. Well, under the structure of your bill, the financing
end i s the same as the other bills.
Mr. Clausen. That is right.
The Chairman. And by the way, along your thoughts, although
this — or to start with, anyway — would be a Government-financed oper-
ation, at least your bill and the Boggs and Taft bills do provide for
authority to receive loans, gifts, and so on. And there would be an
avenue of soliciting private financing.
Mr. Clausen. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. But the availability of private financing is with-
in the structure of your bill.
Mr. Clausen. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Through that provision, as it is through the pro-
vision, the similar provision of the Boggs-Taft bill.
Mr. Clausen. Yes. This is correct, Mr. Chairman.
As we progress, I would think at the proper time I would be in-
clined to offer amendments to this end, but without the full benefit
of testimony such as you gentlemen have heard before your commit-
1464 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
tee, I wouldn't feel as though 1 were as qualified to advocate such
amendments, as would the committee. Plowever, I am convinced in
my own mind, with the integrity of this great connnittee, that you
will be evaluating that possibility, because I have talked to you in-
dividually and I am convinced that you yourselves want to make
sure that w^e retain the control in the Congress. Also, control, if it
is at all possible, by the private sector.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Am 1 correct in my understanding, Mr. Clausen,
that you have put rather more emphasis on the privat-e sector than
possibly some of the other proposals do ?
Mr. Clausen. Yes, sir; and as a source, now that I have had an
opportunity to study this, I would recommend, for instance, that the
gentlemen on this committee call together some of the leaders of our
foundations; call together the leadership of our labor organizations
and some of our major trade associations, the U.S. Chamber, some of
these people, and put the recommendation flat on the table and say,
"Gentlemen, can you meet this responsibility? Will you get behind
us? Will you help to publicize this concept, if the committee comes
forth with a strong recommendation ? Let's see if we can't come up
with a method of finance alternatives to the Federal financing first."
Mr. JoiiANSEN. Well, that leads to my next question. The major
difference in the legislation you would recommend, between what
you do recommend and what is in the other approaches, would be in
this area of nongovernmental financing. Is that correct ?
Mr. Clausen. That is correct. And I am sure that, down dee]) in-
side, each and every one of us would agree that our major problem
here in advancing this concept is going to be one of finance. The only
reason, I am sure, that the members of the committee that have worked
on this for a long period of time are even considering Government is
because they are not certain whether or not they can raise the money in
the private sector.
Well, here again, I would like to see a major concentration of effort
in this field, because more people are thinking this way. Just recently
in the Wall Street Journal^ for instance, there was an article that ex-
j^ressed this very point of view, that there is in formation now an
executive, private peace corps. I think you could bring in a number
of our leaders of the various international church missionary vol-
unteer programs. They could give yon some ideas in this area.
I think the most important thing that I could recommend to this
committee is that you vigorously endorse this Freedom Academy con-
cept. Whether it be by concurrent resolution or whether it be by a
bill, this is up to you to decide, but here again, there are two funda-
mental points that T am concerned about.
One, I don't have quite the confidence in what the State Department
has been doing internationally, so I tlierefore would like to have some
agency that is concerned about international problems be responsive
to the Congress, to the legislative branch, if it is at all possible, and
in the matter of finance, I say again, we must convince the leadership
of our private sector that they have a new role in helping to provide
for our security, as we continue the economic and political warfare
with the Soviet Union. The Congress might consider broadening tax
incentives to motivate this effort.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1465
Mr, JoiiANSEN. I believe in Admiral Burke's testimony yesterday
he stated that there would, of course, be an effort to infiltrate this type
of organization. Commission or Academy. Would you feel that — if
this is a fair question — that the hazards of such infiltration would be
greater if it were strictly under Government auspices or ^eater if it
were under private auspices?
Mr. Clausen. Well, there is no question in my mind but that it
would be greater if it were financed by Government. This is the rea-
son that I ]:)laced this emphasis in the private sector. I think that we
again could go out and experiment. We would have a lot more flexi-
bility if it were financed and promoted by the private sector, but our
key to this, Mr. Johansen, is to motivate the private sector to recognize
that they have a new responsibility for providing for our security.
We have reached this point of no return in the so-called nuclear
stalemate and, in my judgment, we have to educate these people to the
fact that they have an entirely new responsibility. These people are
the only ones that are familiar with the private enterprise system.
These are the onJy ones that can actually sell the American private
enterprise system overseas.
I would not want to see them inhibited by a Government organiza-
tion.
Mr. ScHADEBERG. I have no questions. I just want to thank you.
Don, for coming.
Mr, Clausen. Thank you.
Mr. ScHADEjjERG. And giving your testimony, and certainly we will
be discussing it often,
Mr. Clausen. Thank you very much, Mr, Chairman.
The Chairman. Is Mr. Berle with us ?
We are delighted to have you, sir. We know of your service to
Government in the past, but for the record, I wish you would give us
a capsule resume of your background and your experience.
STATEMENT OF HON. ADOLF A. BERLE
Mr. Berle. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, it is a privilege to appear
here. My name is Adolf A. Berle, I am a lawyer practicing in New
York. I am professor emeritus and also lecturer in law at the Law
School of Columbia University, and I have a variety of other connec-
tions which perhaps are less interesting here.
I was on the expert staff of the American commission to negotiate
peace with Germany in 1918-1919 and first encountered the Soviet
thrust then.
Later, I was on various diplomatic missions for the LTnited States
from 1933 on. From 1938 through 1944, 1 was Assistant Secretary of
State, and at various times Acting Under Secretary of State and
Acting Secretary of State during World War II.
Thereafter I was Ambassador to Brazil. More recently, I served a
turn in the Department of State in 1961 as head of President Ken-
nedy's task force on Latin America. I have maintained my contacts
with two areas, notably the groups proceeding out of the Iron Curtain
countries in Eastern Europe, and in Latin America, connections which
continue up to as late as last night.
(At this point Mr, Schadeberg left the hearing room.)
1466 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
Mr. Berle. I have prepared a statement here, which, if the commit-
tee will permit, I will not read, but merely put into the record. I don't
think that you need it read.
The Chairman. Well, it is always more desirable to us, if satis-
factory to the person making a presentation, to have him talk from
rather than read a statement, so that would be fine, but you may do
either one.
Mr. Berle. No, I should rather talk from it, if I may, and offer this
statement into the record.
The Chairman. The statement will be included in the record. (See
pp. 1480-1483.)
Mr. Berle. The statement, I may add, was prepared, so far as the
textual comments are concerned, with relation to the old bill, the 1961
bill, the Herlong bill, so-called. Some of the comments which I make
in this statement have already been taken care of in the Taft-Boggs bill
and in Representative Clausen's bill, so that perhaps we can talk more
generally about the conception, and if some of the textual comments
here are inapposite, it is because the recent redrafting of the bill makes
them now umiecessary.
The Chairman. Well, you have been partly responsible for the new
draftsmanship at this time.
Mr. Berle. I am very much aware of that and, may I add, I think
that the revised bills are a great improvement over the old bill.
The Chairman. Incidentally, with great humility, Sid Herlong,
Congressman Herlong, said the same thing — that he preferred the
Boggs-Taft draft.
Mr. Berle. Well, I am very sure of that, because many of the
changes result from a change in the international and diplomatic situ-
ation since 1961. In fact, it is to that that I want to address a few
remarks.
At the time when we began considering the conception of the Free-
dom Academy, there was a single, united Communist push. It was
described as "the international Commmiist conspiracy." I have never
liked the word, because what really existed was an undeclared war,
carried on without bothering to declare it in a great many parts of the
world. But today there is no longer a single Communist conspiracy,
nor even a single undeclared war.
In the past year, some of the forecasts many of us had made were ful-
filled. The Soviet-Chinese break became not only complete but prob-
ably, for the time being, irreparable, so that the Communist drive split
into two parts, and they are different.
In addition to that, there were a couple of smaller dissident elements,
notably the Titoist movement, which now emerges as a third force. Let
me give, if I may, a specific illustration which isn't contained in my
statement.
Six weeks ago, actually on March 31 of this year, there was a revolu-
tion in Brazil. This happens to be a subject which I have the pleasure
of knowing something about. Specifically, there were three distinct
Communist movements mixed up in the attempt to create a dictator-
ship behind the facade of the Goulart government. One of them was
National ist-Titoist. This was relatively^ small in power — largely a
group of intellectuals plus some politicians who thought they could
make profit out of it.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1467
There was a second, which was much more powerful, though gradu-
alist. This was the Soviet Communist group. There was a third,
highly activist, the Chinese Communist group, which was pushing for
an immediate takeover. It was that last push, I think, that caused the
then President Goulait to undertake a series of measures looking to-
wards making him a variety of Brazilian Castro. It was at that point
that Brazil, 90 percent of which wanted no part of any of this, pulled
itself together, changed its government, and got away on a new tack,
a tack which I personally think is very much more hopeful. There
had been, you see, two main Communist movements and a third dis-
sident element, all working somewhat at cross-purposes. However,
they were all against the United States and all for a temporary Gou-
lart dictatorship, all against democracy as we know it in BrazU.
I happened to have followed the progress both of the Communist
plans and of the proposal to resist them, for a good many months
prior to the time when the climax came on March 31.
Splitting up the Communist movement means that your Freedom
Academy no longer would be working out a strategy against a single
master plan, which was the phrase Representative Clausen used, but
must meet a variety of shifting situations with all kinds of cross-
alliances. Its problem will be infinitely more complex, even, than
the older one. Whether more or less dangerous, I don't know.
Mr. JoHANSEN. May I interrupt just at that point ?
Mr. Berle. By all means.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Just to ask you : In your judgment, is the fact of
this diversity and even conflict within the Communist world
Mr. Berle. It is a real conflict, sir.
Mr. JoHAXSEN. Yes, but is that a source of potential advantage or
comfort or benefit to us? Does it make the Communist threat any
less critical ?
Mr. Berle. No; it may make it more dangerous. It will depend,
now, on the area in which each situation happens to emerge. I mean
by that, in some places, the movements may paralyze each other. In
still others, it may mean that the intensity of competition between
them will force more drastic action. In certain areas where one or
the other group has the complete mastery of the situation, it may make
the difficulties for ns more intense.
I think you can't answer that question in general, Mr. Congressman.
I should like to give one, but I have been too long in this to think that
there are easy answers. Perhaps that is the best I can do.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Well, then, it would be at least an attempt at an
easy answer to assume that it is automatically beneficial to us ?
Mr. Berle. That is entirely too easy an answer. In point of fact,
I think that the actual dangers from the situation as they are looming
up are probably greater than they were before, though I hope they
are not. That may be the technical answer. I hope that the phrase
will not be used, "Communist conspiracy," nor the "Communist master
plan," but use what is the fact, "Communist imperialism," or "im-
perialist communism."
Let me say something here that I hope will not shock the committee
unduly. If a country, of its own accord and minding its own business,
decides to build a situation not based on private property and not
unfriendly to the United States, I do not think the United States
1468 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
would have any real right to object, nor perhaps should it object. We
may take a pretty dim view of the success of such an experiment, but
if internally a country of its own free will decides to try something of
that nature, and I think it may be tried in Latin America in one coun-
try, I personally wouldn't see that it made any particular difference
to us.
It is when these movements first have as their primary objective
enmity to the United States and, second, to conquer their neighbors,
that we get into the act.
I spoke of one country in Latin America. I was thinking particu-
larly of Bolivia. That is a 95 percent Guarani and Aymava Indian
country, where the tribes have never had private pro]:)eriy in our sense
of the term. Their property, as they know it, is primarily owned by
Indian villages. And indeed, in some parts, a he-man does not interest
himself in private property ; that is for women and children. In other
words, they have the tribal conception, and if they have to build on
that conception instead of on ours, this is perfectly all right with me,
and I think with most Americans. This is their privilege, if they
want to try it. We may not think that it will be very successful in the
modern world, but that is their affair. For that reason, I suggest that
we are not fighting to impose a system we have on someone else, but
to try to prevent the conquest of perfectly peaceful countries by im-
perialism, using a Communist idea as their primary point of attack.
I trust that point of view does not shock the committee. There are
people who feel they want to fight socialism anywhere.
The Chairman. Not at all.
Mr. Berle. And I personally have no interest at all in fighting it,
providing it minds its own business, observes international law, can
be reasonably friendly to the United States, and does not undertake
to conquer its neighbors.
Now the situation is a little more complex, even, than we made out
here, and I am glad to see that the Taft-Boggs bill recognizes that
fact.
Senator Fulbright recently made a widely publicized speech, and
he suggested that the world was no longer polarized into two blocs.
Of course he was right about that. I could not agree with him that
Cuba was a nuisance, rather than a menace. The fact is that as long
as Cuba is held by a major overseas Communist imperialist power,
it will be a menace, and nobody can make it anything else. Qua Cuba,
he is right. But if, and as long as, it is held by Russian troops —
Soviet troops, I should say — and influenced primarily by Soviet po-
litical initiative and is an instrument of the Soviet Union in its im-
perialism, it is a menace, and we can't make it any' hing eke.
At the moment, my information is that the inti igues are beginning
as between the Soviet group and the Chinese group in Cuba. The
arrangements, tacit or otherwise, arranged after the confrontation of
1962, have never been published. I have no knowledge, and could
not have any loiowledge, of the arrangements on the balance, at least,
worked out between the United States and the Soviet Union at the
time that the missies were supposedly removed.
But even without them, as long as Cuba remains in control of an over-
seas imperialist power, there is no question that there is a menace
there.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1469
Where Senator Fulbright was everlastingly right, however, was in
pointing out that no longer was it a two-sided operation. The Soviet
bloc has broken up, as we have seen. One of their objectives, un-
questionably, the objectives of both Soviet and Chinese Communist
political strategy, would be to break up the Western bloc. They will
intrigue with any member of the NATO bloc that is willing to work
with them. President de Gaulle, indeed, had a flirtation with Com-
munist China a while ago. We don't know where that will wind up.
It would be logical for the Soviet Union to attempt a similar flirta-
tion, if it could possibly find an opening with some other member
of NATO. Meanwhile, we have dissident Communist countries in
between, who will be vibrating backwards and forwards. Both the
Chinese bloc and the Soviet bloc will be endeavoring to absorb
weakly held territory wherever they can, notably in Africa and in
Latin America — Latin America, at the moment, is as it seems to me
the major theater — and we are thus really back to a situation of fluid
diplomacy.
This means in substance that we shall be in a situation very like
that in which we were just prior to World War I. Then, as you will
recall, there were alliances and counteralliances, balance-of-power
politics, leading to a point at which a tiny incident (in that case the
murder of an archduke) blew up the whole situation. We are not too
far from that now, in my judgment, as witness the growing danger
of a tiny affair in Cyprus. Of itself, this aifair is of no great im-
portance, but is intentionally used by the Soviet Union (as witness
a speech of Mr. Khrushchev only 3 days ago) to create as much ten-
sion as possible between the Greeks and the Turks. These are two
NATO countries, and there is possibility that we might have an ex-
plosion there, just as before World War I the Balkan tensions were
used to create the situation that finally led to World War I.
I suggest, therefore, that the task of this Freedom Academy must
be more positive than negative. That is to say, its primary task is
to lay out a standard of possible organization and action and social
approach to which the countries and the populations of the world
can repair, rather than merely undertaking to say, "We are fighting
the Communist bloc," there being no single Communist bloc to fight.
I would like, if the committee will permit me, to tell one story,
which perhaps indicates the possibilities of this sort of a situation.
For some 10 years, beginning in 1948, there was in Europe what
was called the College de I'Europe Libre, the Free Europe College.
This was established by Americans, and was •
The Chairman. Where was that located ?
Mr. Berle. That was located near Strasbourg, in France. It had
an old cliateau outside of Strasbourg. There we tried to educate the
youngs sons and daughters of the exiles from the Iron Curtain coun-
tries who had been displaced when the Russians seized those countries
at the close of World War 11.
In 1956, the Hungarian revolution came along, and we picked up
a couple of hundred of the students that had been forced out of Hun-
gary as a result of the Soviet occupation of that country. We didn't
try to do the whole job, and maybe the Freedom Academy, when
constituted, can use this technique.
1470 PROVIDING FOR CREATIOxN^ OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
We gave them some short orientation courses and a permanent home
in Europe. Then we arranged fe^o^Ysllips for them to be educated
at various European universities, they coming back to spend their
summer.
The Chairman. If you will pardon be, didn't we have a witness
Avho testified on this bill who was familiar with that very institution?
Mr. McNamara. I don't recall that, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Berle. I think I can claim to be familiar with it, because 1
was chairman of the board of tmstees of that.
The Chairman. I am told it is a different school.
Mr. Berle. I was chairman of the board of trustees of this one.
I think that Mr. Christopher Emmet, who may have testified before
this committee, may have talked about it himself.
The Chairman. That is right.
Mr. Berle. Well, what happened — the reason for telling is merely
to show the possibilities of such an Academy. We took these Hun-
garian students. These were boys who had never known anything ex-
cept Communist training, the youngsters, but they had revolted against
the Communist regime. Through our school, one of them got his
training in economics. Tliereafter, he had to get a job and obviously
couldn't get one in Hungary. He got a job teaching economics at the
former French school in French Congo, what is now the state of the
Congo. Thereafter, came the Congolese revolution, and he stayed
there.
The Congolese state pulled itself together, after a fashion, in due
time, and was admitted to the United Nations. Exactly 6 years after
we had picked him up, without a shirt on his back and given him a
start at the College de I'Europe Libre, he turned up as the economic
adviser to the Congolese delegation in the United Nations and was,
perhaps, as sound and as effective a cooperating influence as one could
have in a difficult situation.
I could duplicate that story 20 times, but this perhaps gives you
the possibilities of the situation.
My first suggestion, therefore, is that we can use this institution to
train the endless numbers of foreign boys who want to find out what
the United States is all about — how it works, why it is successful, how
far our methods can be adapted to theirs, and to establish those con-
tacts and connections by which they can be useful to their own coun-
tries.
Now, of those students, there are a gi'eat many. There are a great
number of young men who talk to me when I am in Latin America, as
I am, usually, once or twice a year. These boys, if they were pro-
Communist, would have no difficulty in getting their training at once.
There is always a quiet individual from the Russian Embassy, where
there is one, or a Cuban Embassy, or the like, who will pick him up,
even in the late high school stage. He can then, after a reasonable ap-
plication, be sent to some institution — the Lenin Institute, if he is
pretty well up. The Friendship University in Moscow, which is not,
I believe, quite as successful at it, but still is very active. There are
similar institutions with which I am not equally familiar in Peking.
These young men would like to knoAv what makes the Conununist
system tick, how it is done, how you work it out, and there is no dif-
ficulty in gettmg an immediate aiTangement where they can go and
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COINIMISSION 1471
get trained. One of my worries today — this is off our line of march —
is that a number of tliose men have been regl^Larly going from parts
of Central America, through Cuba, to Moscow, and now they are com-
ing back. A contingent of about 30 will be coming into Haiti. May
I say this is not classified information. I don't have any. Sometimes
I am not sure that my own information in the areas I do know about
isn't a little better than the classified information the administration
may get here, though this may be vanity on my part. Thirty such
men are said to be returning to Haiti in about a month, and those are
men who have been educated at the Moscow universities.
The Chairman. And they were from Cuba ?
Mr. Berle. From Haiti.
The Chairman. From Haiti. They are coming back.
Mr. Berle. They were taken, and now they are coming back. Now
I surmise that those men will be heard from later.
But if a boy wants to come to the United States, the best we can do
is to arrange a scholarship for him, bring him to the United States, say,
"Here is a great, wide, beautiful country. Go ahead and rove." Which
is not bad as far as it goes, but it would be a great deal better if you
could take him, put him in some one place, give him whatever turned
out to be the necessary period of orientation and training, so that he
knew what to look for, he knew how the system was run, what we were
all about, and then, if he wants to go to some other college and take a
course or to do some observation or something of the kind, we can do
a very useful job. But if we toss a man whose language is different,
with only a minor Imowledge of English, into an American institution
and say, "Here is all of Columbia University ; it is a splendid univer-
sity but it does not do orientation ; it is not there for that,'' and add,
"Help yourself," he is apt to be, unless he is very brilliant, rather a
confused man. He wastes a lot of time and at the end he will come
back to some of us whom he happens to know and say, "Now, will you
please give me a short course in what this is all about ?"
For that reason, I do suggest that a Freedom Academy would have,
on the foreign side, a very real role to play.
Finally — and then I will quiet down — the Americans who go abroad
need a good deal of orientation themselves. I am not talking about
the State Department men. They have their Foreign Service Insti-
tute, for one thing, and if they don't find that sufficient, they have a
variety of excellent technical organizations in foreign affairs, includ-
ing the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies,
doVn here, another excellent Institute of International Kelations at
Columbia, as well as the Fletcher School of Diplomacy near Cam-
bridge, and three or four others around the United States.
But the men who go abroad on foreign aid projects or for the Alli-
ance for Progress in Latin America or who take technical assignments
here, there, and elsewhere, and (as Congressman Clausen said a mo-
ment ago) a good many businessmen who go abroad, have to learn as
best they can. They learn on the job. It^is a good way of learning,
but it takes a long time, and they may make some mistakes.
I think if this orientation had been done, we would have avoided
some of the mistakes that the United States Government made. Let
me take two.
1472 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
As you are aware, we had a disaster at the Bay of Pigs. Paren-
thetically, I myself thmk it was in some respects not as disastrous as
people suppose. If we had not reacted then, I think the United States
would have been fighting on the mainland in the Caribbean area now.
I think that the Bay of Pigs made possible the later confrontation in
1962.
(At this point, Mr. Schadeberg returned to the hearing room.)
Mr. Berle. But let us leave that aside. After that, the Commimist
push was centered on Venezuela, as I think you know. This was not
merely ideological, though it was that. It was strategic, and the
Cuban and Soviet propaganda made no bones about it. They said,
"If we are able to take that piece of ten-itory with its resources of
oil, steel, and developed wealth, we will be able to conquer Latin
America." I am not sure that they weren't right.
The man who really defended the country was President Romulo
Betancourt of Venezuela, a very old and dear friend of mine. Earlier
he had l>e.en systematically hunted out of the hemisphere by the United
States Government as a Communist or an ex-Communist, during the
days of the Venezuelan dictatorship, Perez Jimenez. At one time,
I think I am right in saying that there was no house in the United
States to which he could come, except mine. I happened to know
him from the old days. He had been a student, had joined a Com-
mimist club m the Univei-sity of Costa Rica when he was in exile
there, had learned the game, disliked it, resigned and got out. And
knowing what they w^ere up to, knowing what the Commmiist at-
tackers wanted, he was able to score the greatest single victory we
have had in Latin America — unless the Brazilian victory may be
equal — up to now.
If we had been well enough instructed in these matters as we should
be, we never would have made the mistake of systematically trying
to hunt Betancourt out of the hemisphere. We should not have relied
only on a few private American friends to see that he got asylum,
which he finally got in Puerto Rico. Tliere he and Munoz Marin
worked out the social plans which have made Venezuela the most
brilliant social, economic, and political victory in this hemisphere.
I think perhaps that is enough, together with my statement, and
perhaps I have talked too long already. It is time to stop telling
stories.
The Chairman. Please go on and tell us some more.
Mr. Berle. Well, I will tell you another one. Pepe Figueres, Jose
Figueres, fought the first war against the Communists in Latin Amer-
ica. This was in 1947, in Costa Rica. Then an invasion force — backed
first by the then dictator of Nicaragua, Luis Somoza, and second, by
the Communist organization in Costa Rica — it seems like an odd
combination, but these little Hitler-Stalin pacts are quite usual in
Latin America — endeavored to displace the duly elected Costa Rican
President, a man named Ulate.
Jose Figueres decided that he would resist this movement, which
he did. It finally climaxed, after a 6 weeks' small war, in a pitched
battle on the plains behind Cartago — and Jose Figueres won it. The
armistice was dictated on a drumhead. The provisional government
which was organized then reestablished the duly elected President of
Costa Rica. In the election which came a few years later, Figueres
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1473
presented himself and became President of Costa Kica. But during
that period, eveiy kind of propaganda was made against him up here,
and it was a very difficult period for him.
He also was attacked as a Communist. Actually, he was the best
friend we have had in Central America. It was he who kept Betan-
court's head above water when he was exiled from Venezuela. Later,
Figueres gave asylum to Ramon Villeda ]\Iorales, also a good friend
of the United States and of his own country, who later became Presi-
dent of Honduras. I resented the fact, gentlemen, that there were only
a few of us, and we private men — I was not at the time in public life —
who were endeavoring to hold together the best elements in the situa-
tion and who were accused of communism by people who didn't know
the difference between a Communist and an honest-to-Gocl reformer.
We were under attack because we said, "That man claims to be a social
reformer. He is really in Communist pay."
The United States can't afford that kind of foolishness, and there
ought to be some place in the country where they really know the dif-
ference.
I think perhaps I have said enough to indicate that while I feel that
Freedom Academy has a place, both for training Americans and for
training foreigners, I rather feel, possibly in opposition to Mr. Clau-
sen, that it would have to be financed by the Government. I am rather
doubtful as to whether private financing w^ould work in this. I think
if you are going to do this job, it ought to be well done.
The Chairman. Well, we have received testimony from quite a few
witnesses along that line, who, while agreeing with Congressman
Clausen as to the major role that the private sector must make, yet
concluded that this must be financed by the Government, that no single
college, university, combination of them, is big enough and equipped
well enough to handle this, and it must be through the vehicle of this
bill.
Mr. Berle. Besides which, they have their own job to do. The uni-
versities are pretty well taxed now and are going to be worse taxed
next year. I have had a full schedule at Columbia this year and will
next, so I know this of my own knowledge. I really feel that if this
task is to be done, it will have to be done with Government financing.
The Chairman. Now, may I ask a question at this time ?
Mr. Berle. Please.
The Chairman. Referring to such facilities as we have now the
War College, and so on, in what way do you think that — I wouldn't
say they are deficient, but not well enough equipped or not broad
enough — why can't they do the job ? We have to make a record along
that line, we must demonstrate it. We would like your comments on
that.
Mr. Berle. I do not wish to criticize the War Colleges. For one
thing, I am a lecturer at the Air War College and occasionally at the
National War College, myself, but these institutions are primarily to
train profevssionals in some particular specialized aspect.
At the Air War College, they are training professional officers in the
Air Force. At the National War College, they are training profes-
sional officers for foreign assignment. This means, and should mean,
high emphasis on military technique and on politics only as an adjunct
to it.
1474 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
This is one thing. It is right, and it is proper that they should.
But we do not expect Army officers to make political policy abroad.
We have always had the civil arm as prevalent. Unless he is detached
from the Army and becomes either the head of an occupying force or
a quasi-diplomat, the Amiy officer does not have primary political
jurisdiction. He needs to have political orientation, but the work of
these institutions is highly professional, as indeed it should be. It
would not do for nonprofessional officers.
I speak from some experience, 15 years' experience or more, as lec-
turer at the Air War College.
Again the Foreign Service Institute is primarily professional train-
ing for diplomats. I think some of them could have benefited by the
possibilities of an institution like the Freedom Academy, but most of
them have had a great deal of experience themselves and perhaps don't
need it. That question I respectfully refer to my former colleagues
in the Department of State.
We are thinking here, I believe, of two levels. First, there is need
of a variety of intellectual general staff in this problem, which I hope
the Freedom Academy men could furnish. This would mean men
who knew various areas. For example, men who knew the Middle
East and knew the interrelation of the Soviet imperialist drive with
this, that, or the other of the Arab movements ; men who knew Latin
America and knew the impact of this, that, or the other group on
specific parties or groups in the various 20-odd countries. (I say
"odd" because there are a few more about to come in ; there are actually
20 independent countries in Latin America now.) These men could,
therefore, explain the lines and the methods of attack used in these
various countries. This is on the intellectual side.
Second, when men come in for training, planning to go to one or
another part of the world, the trainees could have both the general
orientation and some immediate knowledge of who meant what in the
area to which they were going. This is the knowledge that some of us
have accumulated in various areas through a lifetime of experience.
This is hard to get and hard to learn on the ground.
We are thinking, therefore, of this double stratum of a Freedom
Academy faculty, if you wish to call it that, and of men who go there
for orientation training. There you have, perhaps, the picture. No
institution now offers that anywhere.
The Chairman. Now there is some honest, sincere feeling of mis-
understanding, and I suppose I must use the word "suspicion," that
this institution could on the one hand be dominated — and that is a
strong word — by the State Department or, on the other hand, could
interfere witli the State Department's proper conduct of foreign af-
fairs. I personally think that both can be avoided. What are your
views on that? Can we have both an independent, effective Academy
and an independent, effective State Department ?
Mr. Berle. I share your feeling. I think those evils can be avoided.
I can perfectly understand, having sj^ent many years of my life in
the Department of State, the dislike of the State Department to have
other groups barging in where they have the primary responsibility.
That is perfectly understandable.
On the other hand, I can't feel that the technical diplomatic ap-
proach is the primary approach or even the only approach in these
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1475
matters. The State Department does not have control over the United
States Information Agency. It does not have primary control ov^er
the Army. The centralized control ought to be a matter of policy,
which should, of course, be centered in the White House. There "is
no other place that I know of that it can be.
The views of the State Department as to what ought to Ije done at
any given moment of time are one thing. The view as to the overall,
continuing intellectual, and may I use an old-fashioned word, "spiri-
tual" drive, is something else. That can never be the property either
of the State Department or of the War College or, for that matter,
of the Freedom Academy. But the attempt to state what is the na-
tional point of view, or at least the national consensus, I think, has
to lie outside any department that I know yet.
I do not mean that there are not men in the State Department
who could do it; there are. I do not mean that there are not men
in the Army who could do it ; there are. Or any of the other agen-
cies. But when it comes to meeting issues, the State Department pri-
marily is the avenue of contact with other governments. They have
a terrible time when the government to which their Ambassador is
accredited and which they recognize is intriguing with, let us say,
a Communist power, and they can't, within diplomatic proprieties,
state a point of view to the people of the countiy, because that would
be improper diplomatic intervention. That has to be done outside
formal diplomacy.
You see, this is the great beauty of the Communist system. They
have embassies which may, perhaps, be as correct as yon could possibly
imagine. Somewhere else in the country they have different institu-
tions which operate outside the whole diplomatic milieu. Now your
diplomat is always unhappy when anything interrupts his contact
with the palace. He is right about that. It's his business to get what
he can through that kind of contact. Building up of ideological pres-
sure or, if you choose, outside influence, is not his business, as a general
rule. Occasionally, an extremely able Ambassador can do that, but
the Foreign Service diplomats are rather trained not to do it. It is
not often that we get men as brilliant as, let us say, my friend Kenneth
Galbraith, formerly Ambassador to India, who was able to go outside
diplomatic channels and appeal to public opinion in India. He could
do so largely because he was a professor even more than he was an
Ambassador. Though this happens from time to time, it is rare. And
even when a diplomat does make the attempt, he is entitled to some
help from somewhere, and that kind of work really falls outside the
technical diplomatic area. It is primarily educational in its main
aspect.
The Chairman. Another question that I would like the benefit of
your mature judgment on is this: There has been some expression,
minority expression, before this committee — for these hearings have
been going on for some time — to the effect that the kind of an institu-
tion the bill envisages would engage in "indoctrination," and so on,
and that would be dangerous.
I have never been able to completely understand the argument.
What are your views on that ?
Mr, Berle. Well, I am not quite sure.
1476 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
The Chairman. Well, I can't explain it better, because I am afraid
he didn't make it very clear — the witness I refer to, without naming
names.
Mr. Berle. I share your confusion. I can underetand this : There
is always a fear that indoctrination will be used to try to induce agree-
ment witii some single ideological system in our own country, which
may not be the whole story.
There are many who believe as I do in free enterprise, but many
who also believe that any governmentally owned enterprise is auto-
matically bad. Therefore, the fear is that indoctrination might be
used, let us say, to influence men against, well, the Tennessee Valley
Authority in our own country or the possible establislmient of equiv-
alent experiments abroad. Yet there are many countries abroad where
that kind of operation is the only way the job is likely ever to be done.
We have to be flexible about economic method.
I think there is a fear lest indoctrination would commit the institu-
tion, the Government, and the men trained by it to some unduly nar-
row form of approach. Given the kind of world we have — I have lost
count now, but I think there are 125 governments in the world, and
more coming up, with every kind of a social situation from that of semi-
primitive tribes to highly developed countries of great capacity —
clearly our doctrine can't exclude the kind of approach which in cer-
tain areas would be the only approach possible.
I have thought, therefore, there might be danger that indoctrination
might lead to commitment to too narrow a doctrine.
Actually, there is a common denominator behind all American think-
ing. Indoctrination in that might be a good idea.
We do l>elieve in personal freedom. We do believe in the significance
of the individual. We don't like the police states and miscellaneous
killing and attempts to enslave whole populations. We don't believe
in it, whether done in the name of "people's states" by Communists or
in the name of pure, personal dictatorships like the kind that made
Trujillo, prior to his assassination, one of the richest men in the world.
Neither can it be squared with American doctrine. All Americans do
agree on the general premise of freedom. We do agree on governments
responsive to the will of their peoples, primarily aimed to serve their
peoples and primarily aimed at doing so without that continuous in-
vasion of human rights that is gradually accomplishing the failure
of the Communist and Fascist experiments.
I personally don't feel that we need to be afraid of indoctrination
in its real sense. I can, of course, see the possibilities of abuse.
The Chairman. Two more questions, and the first might lead to the
second. What are some of the provisions in the Taft-Boggs bill that
improved the Herlong bill, and then, after you answer that, would you
have any further recommendations to make ?
Mr. Berle. I would want to study a little more than I have the Taft-
Boggs bill and the Clausen bill, which appear to me on a very casual
go-over as about the same, barring the question of financing.
A good many of my textual quarrels — I won't say "quarrels," but
"suggestions" — with relation to the old Herlong bill seem to have
been clarified or cleaned up.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1477
I think, for example, that the phrase "international Communist con-
spiracy" has generally been eliminated right through. I am not sure it
has not already been done.
I should like, if I may, perhaps to save the time of the committee, a
chance to go over the bills more closely textually.
The Chairimlvn. We would appreciate that.
Mr. Berle. If I have any bright ideas as to the text, I would be glad
to send them to the committee.
The Chairman. I think that would be valuable, not now, if you
wish, but in the same paper, if further improvements come to your
mind, I wish you would set them out.
Mr. Berle. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I have assumed
that the Taft-Boggs bills had carried forward a good deal of the
thinking of the various men who worked on it, and perhaps of this
committee as well, and that the ultimate form of this bill Vv'ill be draft-
ed in committee on this base. I assume the bill isn't frozen, so that
anyone could say, "Because I want this changed, 1 am against the
bill."
The Chairman. Well, we want as much in the record for that pur-
pose as we can, if you will give some thoughts to that.
Mr. Berle. I will be glad to do so. I don't consider myself ade-
quately prepared to make a textual conunent on H.R. 10037, wliich is
the Clausen bill, or H.R. 8320, which is the Taft bill and, I gather,
the same as the Boggs bill ; and if I may, I will submit any textual sug-
gestions that occur to me.
The Chairman. I should have said the Taft-Boggs-Clausen bill.
Mr. Berle. They are substantially the same. They are an improve-
ment, in my judgment, of the original Herlong bill.
Mr. Johansen. Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Berle, I would like to ask a question or two that may seem afield
from the subject that you are testifying to, but I think I can relate it in
a moment, and this is said to lay the background.
Am I correct in my understanding that Mr. Herbert Matthews of
the New York Times was a leader in developing not only certain pub-
lic impressions with regard to Castro and his regime in Cuba, but
was also a source, by instruction, of certain guidance or misguidance
of the State Department in the early stages of that takeover ?
Mr. Berle. As to the first, you are right. As to the second, I hap-
pen to know the facts, and I think that that is somewhat of a mis-
understanding.
Mr. Matthews had visited Castro when he was starting his revolution
in the Sierra Maestra and had returned to New York. An Ambas-
sador-designate of the United States was going to Havana. My
foraier public relations officer, who has been very unjustly accused in
this business, Mr. William A. Wieland, was then in charge of Cuban
affairs. He was asked by a famous United States Senator to direct the
new Ambassador to New York and to suggest that he talk with Mr.
Matthews. Mr. Wieland passed on that suggestion.
May I add the Senator in question w^as perfectly honest in doing it ;
so was Mr. Wieland. Further, it was a perfectly intelligent thing
to do. If you are going to a country, and there is a revolution, to
talk to the man who has firsthand knowledge of that revolution, before
you get there, is a perfectly sane, sensible thing to do.
30-471 — 64— pt. 2 ^16
1478 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
Wieland. did not ask the Ambassador to agree with Mr, Matthews
or to accept his estimate or his views or anything else, but merely
to inform himself about the situation. Ambassadors, before they go
to their country, commonly do connect with the individuals in the
United States who know most about it, as a part, of their briefing.
That, I think, is all that happened.
Later, an attempt was made — first, let me add that, in my judgment,
Mr. Matthews, whom I know and whom I believe to be a perfectly
honest man, was entirely deceived as to the real nature of the Castro
revolution. I think he was honestly deceived, in his defense. Though
I have no call to defend him, I may add that a great many first-rate
Cubans who were associated with Castro were equally deceived. If
Mr. Matthews got it wrong, so did a great many Cubans as well. In
fairness to Mr. Matthews, with whose views I do not agree, I think
that ought to be stated. I see absolutely nothing improper in suggest-
ing to an American Ambassador about to go down there that he talk
to the last man on the ground. It is an Ambassador's business to make
up his own mind.
To represent this as a plot to try to steer an American Ambassador
into the Castro movement, I think is mijust to everybody concerned.
These are my own views on the matter.
It is true that Mr. Castro turned out to be, if not a member of the
Communist Party, at least for all practical purposes, a Communist
agent. It is true that he claims now that he was so all along and that
that perhaps should have been discovered at the time.
May I add that I speak here with a clear record myself. In early
1959, I thought the Communists were taking over Cuba and I wrote
an article for The Rejyorter magazine in which I said so. In 1960, I
wrote a very careful article in the Foreign Affairs, which is a rathei-
blue-ribbon journal of foreign afi'airs, saying that I thought Cuba was
already a Soviet satellite.
By consequence in defending anyone who was deceived, I do so al-
though I held a contrary view at the time, and the record is there to
show it.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Now, my purpose in raising these questions was not
to pillory Mr. Matthews.
Mr. Berle. I want to say something about Mr. Wieland, because he
got the roughest ride and the rawest deal of any man I know. He was
my public relations man when we had a similar situation in Brazil.
There couldn't have been a more loyal opposition to Communist at-
tacks on the United States than Bill Wieland. His career was wrecked
by the attacks on him, and I would like to put into this record an hon-
orable attempt to set the record straight.
Excuse me.
Mr. JoHiVNSEN. That is all right. My purpose in raising the ques-
tion, and for the sake of developing my pomt, let us assume that Mr.
Matthews was perfectly honest in his intentions, there was no sinister
motive or purpose in his advocacy, but the question that I am coming
to is : To what extent might there be a danger that, either through hon-
est error or through sinister design, the Freedom Academy might be-
come the vector for misinformation or misguidance or misinterpreta-
tion of current developments in this whole vast area, complex area of
Communist imperialism ?
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1479
Mr. Berle. There is a certain danger in it. I do not consider the
danger great. The difticidty in the Cuban situation was the fact
that there was not enough coverage, whereas the Freedom Academy
is proposing more coverage. One of the great difficulties in Latin
America is that there have been only two or three sources of journalistic
information and ox)inion in the entire United States.
The NeiD York Times is one of them. Time magazine is another
one. I think there are two or three others now. When there is so
slender coverage as that, the honest mistake or, as you say, possibly
the sinister design of any one source of information can make an im-
mense amount of trouble.
One of my hopes is that the Freedom Academy would spread out
the amount of information we have, so that the mistake of any single
source, be it of news or opinion, could be corrected.
Obviously, if the Freedom Academy undertook to centralize all of
them, the danger of abuse would be greater.
As it is set up here, I do not think that the danger of abuse is very
great. Clearly, if you assume that any Government mechanism can
be subverted, you assume danger. But I think we all of us know
that while this possibility exists, and always has existed since spies
were first sent into Canaan by Joshua, it also corrects itself rather
rapidly in our system. I am certain that correction would be promjit
in the Freedom Academy.
One of the reasons why I believe in a free press is that the widest
possible coverage, with all its difficulties and disadvantages, is the
best corrective.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Because it tends to be self -correcting ?
Mr. Berle. Yes.
Mr. JoHANSEN. To what extent — and I ask this final question in
view of the opinion expressed by Admiral Burke yesterday — to what
extent would you feel that the Freedom Academy would be a target
of attempted infiltration, exploitation, and abuse by sinister forces?
Mr. Berle. Well, I think it would, but then I think everyone and
every agency who stands up for a free government is going to be the
target of abuse, possibly infiltration, by the forces in opposition.
I think all of us have, at one time or another, either been approached
or have been abused — in my case, both have happened — by someone
who thinks that some tiny fragment of influence can be absorbed,
abused, or removed, as the case may be.
That is part of our times. That is what a cold war is. I concede
the danger, but I think that the same danger probably attaches to
any position of influence, whether it is a job on the New York, TiTnes
or a job in the Department of State or in the United States Army or on
a congressional committee. That is exactly what this kind of situ-
ation implies. So, while I think Burke is perfectly right in what he
said, I don't consider the danger here any greater than it is in another
key spot in the United States administration.
Mr. Schadeberg. I have no questions.
I would just like to apologize for having had to be absent for the
first part of your testimony. I would have liked to have been here,
and I am sorry that I had to leave.
The Chairman. Off the record.
(Discussion off the record.)
1480 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
Mr. Clausen. Mr. Chairman, I simply Avonder if I could be afforded
the same privilege of offering some possible recommended changes on
my bill.
The Chairman. Surely.
Thank you very much, Mr. Berle. We are very appreciative of your
willingness to cooperate.
Mr. Berle. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
(At. this point Mr. Willis left the hearing room.)
Mr. Berle. No more questions ?
I apologize for having taken up so much time.
Mr. JoHANSEN (presiding). We solicited it, Mr. Berle.
(Mr. Berle's formal statement follows :)
STATEMENT OF HON. ADOLF A. BERLE
I appear in favor of the bill to create a Freedom Commission and a Freedom
Academy. It bas been before tbe 87tb Congress as H.R. 8935. It requires modi-
fication in the light of present conditions, but the proposed institution can serve
a very useful purpose. Since the bill was introduced in 1961 the international
scene has altered. I think the congressional findings embodied in section 2 were
a not unfair statement of matters as they stood in 1961, but the situation has
now altered.
The organized international Communist movement was in unity in 1961. Now
it is split into a number of opposed factions. The two principal sectors are,
respectively, the Communist movement as promoted by the Soviet Union on
the one hand, and a more extreme version of it promoted by the Commvmist
regime in mainland China. In addition to these, there are smaller dissident
fragments, one of which is sponsored by the Government of Yugoslavia, and a
second which may be in formation, revolving around attempts by Rumania par-
tially to detach herself from the Soviet bloc and become, if not neutral, at least
mediator between the Chinese and Soviet blocs. The final lineup is not yet fixed
though it may occur if, as is discussed, a world Communist Congress is called
by the Soviet Union or Red China this year.
Each of the two principal Communist factions — that sponsored by the Soviet
Union and that of Communist China — is, I think, less doctrinaire than straight
nationalist-imperialist. In each case, the real objective appears to be that of
bringing additional territories under the conquest of, or vrithin the political or
military sphere of influence of, the sponsoring power — China or the Soviet
Union, as the case may be. Properly speaking, they thus are "imperialist," and
their ideological objectives are subordinated to nationalist and expansionist
goals of the two powers. Instead, therefore, of calling this "the international
Communist conspiracy" — the phrase used in the bill — I should recommend
abandoning the phrase and using consistently the phrase, "imperialist com-
munism."
Senator Fulbright, in a recent widely publicized speech, suggested that the
world was no longer polarized between the Communist bloc and the free world
bloc and that the United States should recognize that fact. I think he was
right in that respect, though I did not agree with his belief that Cuba was a
nuisance, rather than a menace. The implications of this breakup, however, are
not happy. We may be coming into a very fluid diplomatic situation.
Each of the two major Communist powers will be seeking alliances and
counteralliances against each other — and, of course, against the United States.
Either one may develop an interest in bringing about a state of war between the
United States and the other Commimist power, leaving itself "neutral," intending
to pick up diplomatic plunder at the close. This was what Stalin intended in
1939 by making the famous Hitler-Stalin Pact, and what he did do later with
some effectiveness as the United States and Japan fought out the war in the
Far East. The Soviet Union could profit by war between the United States and
Communist China ; Communist China could profit by war between the Soviet
Union and the United States.
Meantime, both will endeavor to work out alliances, counteralliances, and
balance-of-power politics, combined with attempts to absorb weakly held ter-
ritory— as, apparently, the Chinese are endeavoring to do in Africa today and
as the Soviet Union has been attempting to do in the Caribbean up to a few
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1481
months ago, if indeed she is not still attempting to do so. And, of course, either
side will make as much capital as they can out of any opening they may find
for alliance or eounteralliance in Western Europe or the Middle East.
This resembles the situation before World War I. It will be a period of
very complex and very uneasy diplomacy and will be intensely difficult to
meet. It will not be, as the language of the bill under review here says, a "care-
fully patterned total aggression * * * of the Communist bloc." It is more
likely to be a shifting collection of major and minor Communist-imperialist diplo-
matic moves, chiefly inspired by opportunism.
Obviously one objective will be the weakening of the United States and of
the NATO combination, wherever and whenever possible.
This means that the central conception of the Freedom Academy must be posi-
tive rather than negative — must build around the objectives, ideals, capacities,
and goals of the United States, rather than merely opposition to a central Com-
munist plan.
Let me add that I do not relish the emerging diplomatic pattern. It will be
diflScult at best and dangerous all the time.
My own interest in an institution of this sort comes from two sources. I
have been active in the Free Europe Committee and, among other things, in
the attempt to rescue the young men and women exiled from the Iron Curtain
countries after World War II. I have also been deeply interested, as well as
involved, in the endless struggle for progress in Latin America. As you are
aware, Latin America is a major theater in the cold war. This is also the
area in which the United States is most steadily and most bitterly attacked.
Perhaps that would have been true in any case. But with the seizure of the
Cuban bridgehead a readymade staging ground fell into Russian Communist
hands, though there is reason to believe Chinese Communists are intriguing
to secure control of it now. From this bridgehead, not only political warfare
but paramilitary and direct military actions have been launched and in greater
or less degree are progressing now despite the major defense victory in Ven-
ezuela. As Secretary Rusk observed the other day, several Latin American
countries are in direct line of fire at the moment.
Many of my Latin American friends ask me where in the United States they
can go to have concise, direct instruction as to how the American system
work.s — and why it works^and what it has achieved — and how far it can be
adapted to the customs of other countries. I know of no such place. Yet the
embassy of any Communist country knows exactly where to send its friends.
There is the Lenin Institute and the Friendship University in Moscow, and
reportedly there are training centers in Cuba. There are equivalent institu-
tions in Communist China. About all the United States can do is to invite
students here, give them liberty to rove the vast United States, and find out
what they can.
Actually, the American system is a highly integrated combination of ideas
on the one hand and direct government machinery on the other. I endeavored
to describe it last year in a book entitled The American Economic Republic,
a copy of which I now offer to this comittee as an exhibit. I hope it is merely
the outline of more serious studies to be made later on. In any case, it ought
to be possible for a competent group to take men, Americans and foreigners, and
explain with reasonable clarity how the United States works and why it has
been, everything considered, one of the most successful forms of government
in the world. It ought to be possible to explain how this form of government
has produced brilliant results within the ambit of our economic system — as in
Puerto Rico — and how cooperation with it has assisted other countries as in
Venezuela. It ought to be increasingly possible to work out means by which
American methods can be adapted to conditions in other countries though of
course these are usually different from ours.
It ought also to be possible to enable men to see almost at a glance what
social movements are sincerely intended to benefit the less fortunate mem-
bers of society and what movements are merely intended to use grievances —
perhaps legitimate grievances — as a means of recruiting personnel for Com-
munist imperialist purposes. Those of us who have lived with this problem a
long time — I myself have since the time of the Treaty of Versailles — have learned
the technique, and the technique of involving perfectly innocent people with
tainted movements. Organizations are produced in which entirely loyal citizens
can enroll to right social wrongs. The tainted organizations conceal the fact
that their real intent is not to redress social wrongs, but to build subversive
1482 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
movements, subversive propaganda, sometimes even guerrilla force, all di-
rected by some Communist imperialist intelligence or political warfare chief.
Americans as well as foreigners ought to learn how to protect themeselves
against this sort of thing.
Finally, the object of a Freedom Academy of this kind need not and cannot
be merely defensive. We are beginning to know a good deal about the technique
of redressing social wrongs — as well as a good deal about the failures of the
Communist system in this regard.
The United States Government has recently proposed, and in the next decade
will carry through, an antipoverty campaign. It will succeed in this cam-
paign— as nearly as it is possible to succeed, given the frailties and inequalities
of human beings. It should be possible to adapt the ideals and the methods
used in this campaign so that they can be opposed, as an alternative, to pro-
grams put forward whose ultimate result seems merely an extension of im'
perialist communism with very little advantage to the poor, the underprivileged,
and the workers.
The kind of institution envisaged by this bill ought to begin rather modestly,
dealing with specific situations, and should not endeavor to cover the entire wide
world in its first activities. It should build its theoretical and its practical
side soundly and well, and expand as experience shows it is useful.
If, in any country, communism were not imperialist — if it did not seek to con-
quer, seize, or draw into its orbit other countries — necessity for a Freedom
Academy would be far less. Countries do have a right to endeavor to build a
civilization not based on private property — if that is what their people want. As
long as they observe international law, mind their own business, and do not seek
to conquer or subvert other countries, the United States has not, I think, any
real reason to object — though we may take a dim view of the success of these
experiments. When, however, they finance, first, subversive propaganda, then
guerrilla movements, and finally build up and foment civil wars in other coun-
tries, aiming to take over power themselves, we do have a right to object and, of
course, doubly so when attempt is made to attack the United States abroad or
to interfere in the internal affairs of the United States. It is the linking of the
Communist propaganda organization and arms with imperialism in the true
sense of that term — an endeavor to seize power over other countries— that en-
dangers world peace, as well as the lives and welfare of many millions of people
w ho are involved.
I venture to suggest some textual revision.
I suggest the change, throughout, of the words "international Communist con-
spiracy" to "imperialist communism."
Section 2 ought to be revised in the light of current developments in the diplo-
matic world.
Paragraph 3 of the findings ought now to be deleted. A couple of "neutralist
Communist parties" are emerging whose ideology does envisage "neutrals" in
the struggle between capitalism and communism.
I oppose inclusion of subparagraph (4) of the findings. We did suffer defeats
in the cold war, and we all know it. More recently we have scored a couple
of notable victories, albeit defensive. I would mention particularly the brilliant
success of free democratic government in Venezuela under the presidency of Ro-
mulo Betancourt and the defeat by Venezuela of a Russian-supported attempt to
seize that country by Castro terrorist and guerrilla attack. Also I believe the
events of April 1964 in Brazil represented a wholesale resistance by that great
country against the intrigues both of the Soviet Union and of Communist China
looking toward seizure of the Brazilian Government. Communist efforts in
Brazil were not, however, united. Both the Soviet Union and Communist China
wished to increase their power over Brazil. But their organizations were also
maneuvering against each other and apparently still are though my own in-
formation on the subject is incomplete. Both, however, were defeated, and I see
no reason why we should insist on the finding of disaster in paragraph (4) . His-
tory is moving too fast.
Some textual changes can be made in paragraph 5.
I should advocate striking out paragraph 6, or rephrasing it by striking out the
first full sentence in that paragraph and rephrasing the second sentence.
I do not see the necessity of maintaining subparagraph (c) of paragraph 7.
The need that Federal officials engaged in foreign affairs should understand the
problem should, I think, be taken for granted without putting it in a legislative
finding.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1483
I should likewise delete subparagraph 8 of this section. The objectives un-
happily will not be accomplished by a crash program. This is going to be a long
pull as President Kennedy repeatedly observed.
In section 6 I suggest some minor changes in phraseology. Subparagraph (1)
of that section could be improved.
Brought up to date, I believe this bill offers a useful addition to the Ameri-
can collection of foreign policy tools.
Mr. JoHANSEX. Mrs. Chapelle. We are happy to have you here.
Before we proceed, the stall' has handed me two biographical and in-
formational items regarding the witness, in the New York Times of
February 1, 1962, and April 14, 19G2, and without objection, we will
incorporate them in the record.
(The two newspaper articles follow:)
[The New York Times, Thursday, February 1, 1962]
Books of the Times
(By Charles Poore)
Women are decidedly men's equals. We all know that — vive though we may
the differences. Also, they come under the infinite province of Orwell's Law ;
many women are much, much equaler than others.
As prime example we have today Dickey Chapelle's exuberant new book,
"What's a Woman Doing Here?" * the story of her adventures as a combat
reporter in our feverishly truculent world. Put it on your reading list now.
Mrs. Chapelle deplores war. Yet she feels that if sheltered people are going
to spend so much time talking about it some of them should go out and see how
it is conducted.
Those w ho write current history have an obligation, in particular, to do original
research from time to time — an arduous discipline, no doubt, and not one that
will commend itself irresistibly to pundits who from prudent distances become
authorities on the havoc of carnage. Yet Mrs. Chapelle has followed it from
World War II in the Pacitic to Algeria, Hungary, Cuba, and, among other places,
Vietnam.
She went mainly to take pictures of men in battle. Her photos are splendid.
So is her capacity to supplement them with words.
ARGUMENT IS KEVERSED
In fact, she occasionally reverses the weary argument about words versus pic-
tures with considerable force. How many photographs, for example, do you
suppose it would take to equal her analysis of Fidel Castro, based on his first
sweep to power? These are the crucial sentences :
"The overwhelming fault in his character was plain to see even then. This was
his inability to tolerate the absence of an enemy ; he had to stand — or better, rant
and shout — against some challenge every waking moment."
However, I .suppose we should give the picture advocates their due in this case.
Much of the ranting and shouting these days comes to us from performances be-
fore television cameras of what history may identify as the first dictator com-
pletely wired for pictures as well as sound. One of the first, anyway. And on the
threshold of being presented in livid color.
Mrs. Chapelle is a Milwaukee girl who arrived on the photographic scene
long after the camera's widest-angle-giving tripod — the airplane — had proved
it was here to stay. Her interest in taking pictures developed from an early
passion for airplanes. Late in the Ninteen Thirties she worked for barnstorming
aerobatics shows. Today, while she is not one of our foremost pilots, she is a
parachute jumper of exceptional daring.
You can usually tell that a war is either under way or about to start when-
ever she comes down from some moving point in the sky.
*WHAT'8 A WOMAN DOING HERE? By Dickey Chapelle, Illustrated with photographs
hy the author. 285 pages. Morrow. $5.
1484 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
The most searing ordeal in her book is her account of being held incommuni-
cado in a Hungarian prison. She had gone to report the attempted delivery of
medical supplies to Hungary's heroic young rebels behind the Iron Curtain.
The secret police caught her. In their cells she half froze, half starved and vpas
completely surrounded by terror. Death stalked the cells, death lay behind
her interrogators' endless, numbing questions. "We will not hang you today.
The papers in your case are not complete," she would be told. She was
threatened with several kinds of torture.
reds' aims described
"What the Reds were trying to do," she says with amazing fortitude, "was
to peel back my will like the layers of an onion. My will was to go on being
a woman journalist from America named Ohapelle, a member of a loving family,
above all a human being. Their will was that I become a tool and nothing
more."
Nothing more? Only those who have endured such an ordeal without breaking
have won the right to judge. She fought hard enough to win. And, she says,
"if you fought hard enough, whatever was left of you afterward would not be
found stripped of honor."
[The New York Times, April 14, 1962]
Woman Honored for War Reports— Overseas Press Club Gives Annual
News Awards
Dickey Chapelle, a freelance correspondent, received the highest award of the
Overseas Press Club of America last night for her reports on the fighting in
Vietnam.
At the club's annual awards dinner at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel she received
the $.500 George Polk Memorial Award, named in honor of George Polk, the
Columbia Broadcasting System correspondent who was slain in Greece in
1948.
Miss Chapelle. the second woman to get the award, covered Vietnam on assign-
ment for Reader's Digest. She wrote a book on her experiences entitled, "What's
A Woman Doing Here?"
Others receiving annual awards and citations for achievements in reporting
or interpreting foreign news in 1961 were :
Robert Considine, Hearst Headline Service, award for his series, "We Will
Bury You. Mr. K." Sydney Gruson of The New York Times and Gaston Cob-
lentz of The New York Herald Tribune, citations for reporting from Berlin.
Marvin Kalb, Columbia Broadcosting System, award for his radio reports
from Moscow. Joseph C. Harsch, National Broadcasting Company, citation.
Helen G. Rogers and William Hartigan, American Broadcasting Company,
award for their television program, "The Remarkable Comrades." Robert Young
and Charles Dorkins, National Broadcasting Company, citations.
Peter Leibing, Associated Press, award for his photograph, "Leap to Freedom."
Leonard Stark and Nobuo Hoshi, National Broadcasting Company, award for
film report, "Japan— East is West." William K. McClure, Columbia Broadcast-
ing System, citation.
Charles J. V. Murphy, Fortune magazine, award for his article, "Cuba : The
Record Set Straight." Robert S. Elegant, Newsweek, citation.
Phil Newsom, United Press International, award for "best consistent inter-
pretation of foreign news developments." George Chaplin, the Honolulu Adver-
tiser, citation.
Howard K. Smith, American Broadcasting Company, award for "best radio
interpretation of foreign affairs." Phil C. Clarke, Mutual Broadcasting System,
citation.
David Schoenbrun and George Vicas, Columbia Broadcasting System award
for the program. "The Trials of Charles de Gaulle." Eric Sevareid and Stephen
Fleischman, Columbia Broadcasting System, citations.
John Toland. award for "best book on foreign affairs," "But Not In Shame."
Maurice Hindus, citation.
Juan de Onis. The New York Times, the .$.500 Ed Stout Award for "best article
on Latin America." Robert Hartman, the Los Angeles Times, citation.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1485
Edwin L. Dale, Jr., The New York Times, the ?500 E. W. Fairchild Award for
"best business news reporting from abroad."
The awards were presented by William L. Laurence, science editor of The New
York Times. Edward R. Murrow, director of the United States Information
Agency, spoke.
Mr. JoHANSEN. And you may proceed now as you wish.
STATEMENT OF DICKEY CHAPELLE
Mrs. Chapelle. Thank you, sir, I am very honored to be here today.
It is as a proponent of this legislation that I speak, and further to
the point that its passage is critically long overdue.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Before you proceed, Mrs. Chapelle, and although
we have it in this written record, will you just give us a little back-
ground on yourself and your own experience ?
Mrs. Chapelle. I think that is the next paragraph, sir.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Fine, then you proceed.
Mrs. Chapelle. It has been my privilege to serve as a reporter and
photographer for American news media, most recently The Readefs
Digest and The National Geographic magazine, in areas of conflict
overseas for most of the 20-odd years since, in May of 1942, 1 was first
recognized by the then War Department as a war correspondent.
In the past 8 years, I have been a professional eyewitness to the
uses of force over the intermittent no man's lands between Communist
and free world fighting men in Hungary, Algeria, Lebanon, Cuba,
Korea, Formosa, India, Laos, South Vietnam, and the Straits of
Florida.
Each time I have reported how I saw our side lose — that is, emerge
from the crisis weaker, smaller, or denigrated with an according
increase in the strength, size, or potential of the Communist side.
Yet the reasons obvious to me for our astonishingly poor performance
in our own defense have not been combatant failures. They have been
failures of extramilitary elements, primarily, in my judgment, of the
will at the supporting and diplomatic levels.
As an example, I would cite the fighting I saw in Laos.
The scores of superbly trained military personnel with whom I was
privileged to live and work as an observer on several active fronts for
38 days had been ordered to advise Royal Laotian troops on how to
fight the Communist Pathet Lao armies. They obeyed those orders
eifectively. Wliere they were enabled to remain on duty long enough
to perform in their assigned role, I saw the troops under their practical
leadership repeatedly win local actions. This was accomplished in
spite of the equipment with which the United States had furnished
them — mortars dating from the First World War and aircraft obso-
lete during the Second.
Yet, as you recall, these American personnel shortly were withdrawn
on the excuse that military victory was impossible because "the Laos
just won't fight." Today, as you know, the Pathet Lao troops, ably
led by personnel from the Communist country of North Vietnam, are
macerating the Royal Lao armies and, incidentally — since 9 out of 10
of the Pathet Lao are Laotians — disproving the claim that people of
this nationality Avon't fight. Obviously, under motivated leadership,
they can be and are being victorious combatants.
1486 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
Thus I judge the free world failure in Laos not as a military one, but
in large part due to the tardy emplacement and hasty withdrawal of
too few U.S. advisers — a failure at the supporting and diplomatic
levels.
In the case of Laos, 1 reported that the objectives of the Departments
of State and Defense appeared almost mutually exclusive; while one
was trying to conciliate Keds, the other was trying to kill them. Both
efforts failed and even the simple will to destroy a Communist threat
was negated by the resultant confusion.
Other failures of the non-Communist world — paralysis in the face
of the Hungarian revolution, apathy toward the tragedy of Algeria,
ignorance about pre-Red Cuba, to name three — have, in my judgment,
rested on similar confusions of intent.
The free world simply does not possess a body of leadership person-
nel prepared, committed, and working to counter the Communist ef-
fort to take over the earth by means other than all-out war.
Parenthetically, the fact that the Communist leaders have been
forced to use means other than ultimate violence in this effort should
reassure us that our capability for victory by this method is conceded
by the Communists. But I believe they are winning by thoughtfully
chosen alternate means, simply because we have no command group
to direct the countering of these alternate efforts ; we lack even stra-
tegic and tactical know-how to counter the "war of liberation" and
other extramilitary gambits. Lacking the know-how or even a leg-
islative machinery to try to learn its harsh arts, we lack confidence
and, increasingly, even the will to struggle.
The gi'eatest single step proposed, of which I am aware, is the cre-
ation of the Freedom Commission with its concomitant Academy to
develop tlie body of knowledge and leadership from which a victorious
extramilitary capability can be forged.
Mr, JoHANSEN. Thank you very much.
Mrs. CiiAPELLE. Yes, sir.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Has your experience, particularly as it relates to
Cuba, given you personal knowledge of tlie Communist counterpart of
training activities in that system?
Mrs. Cptapelle. Yes, sir; on two occasions. In 1958, when I was
the last of the 13 American correspondents to go through Batista's
lines to eyewitness the fighting under Castro's leadership, I spent 3
days in a building being used as a headquarters for teachers, victims
of the Batista terrorism who had fled out there to the mountains.
This was commanded by a major known as Red Beard, and I under-
stand Pineiro is his name. Much of the talk at that time among that
group of people was about a higher degree of government control of
education tlian you would normally encounter in a democratic society.
But they did not, at that time, use any of the Communist jargon.
Perhaps I didn't recognize it.
On the other hand, in the institution in Havana — which I have iden-
tified in the course of my coverage for the article I was finally expelled
from Cuba for writing — it was headed by Major Pineiro, and at the
time that it had emerged there, there seemed to be very little doubt
that this was the stepchild, so to speak, of the institution — well, not
institution, the gathering of people that I had originally known dur-
ing the fighting.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1487
The second time that I thought that I had some jiersonal knowledge
of this matter was most recently. I have worked for the ])ast 8 months
with the refugees — exiled freedom fighters in Miami. Much of that
work has included interviews with people who have just come from
Cuba. The statement I am about to make is based on face-to-face
interviews with two men recently from Cuba. I can give you their
code names. I do not know, nor have I ever known, their correct
identification, I am sure for reasons you vrill understand.
Both of these men claim to have been at one time the number two
individual in a Communist subversive training institution in Cuba.
The}^ have stated — and as a reporter I would liave no hestitation to
put my name on this report; I find it completely plausible in the light
of what I know — that there are now 19 training bases or ports of
embarkation for subversive agents leaving for various parts of Latin
America. (Zanzibar was a surprise to me. I had not heard about
that until it broke from the news.) Through those institutions 9,300
people had passed as of, let's see — the boat got blown up January 5 —
it must have been Christmas of 1963.
Mr. JoHANSEN. As a result of your travels and observation and ex-
perience, do you have personal Iniowledge of the need of Government
personnel for the type of training envisioned in the Freedom
Academy ?
Mrs. Chapelle. I would say that I have observed a very great need.
I think I am doing no injustice to the personnel, either military or
diplomatic, with whom I worked overseas to say that my profession,
the press, would be in a difficult position were we to depend on official
briefings. The material that I was given — to give a specific example,
I remember being officiallv briefed, in this city of course, for a visit
that I was making to India — by a very earnest young man from one
of the departments, wearing a uniform, who assured me that, within
the same gross national product, it was going to be necessary for the
Indians to increase their industrial potential and to push China oif
their soil.
I would certainly suggest that as a simple proposition of logic, this
sort of thing, there is no point in wasting anybody's time on it, not a
reporter's nor the briefing officer's. I think we have also been misled
at times, abroad, and it would be my hope that the Freedom Academy
would produce people with whom those of us who go overseas to deal
with information would not be either wasting their time or subject-
ing themselves to misleading and coercive statements of that kind. I
don't think we would have any trouble in getting the press to say,
"Yes, we need a Freedom Academy."
Mr. JoHANSEN. Has your experience in South Vietnam led to the
same conclusion as to the need on the part of our personnel?
Mrs. Chapelle. I think my experiences in every country would
lead me to that conclusion, but I would cite particularly the Laotian
misadventure that I referred to in my prepared statement, and I
would say that the generalization that it was very difficult to get
information from official sources in Laos would certainly apply over
to Vietnam. I cannot imagine that, in the presence of a Freedom
Academy, reporters would be as misled and misadvised by intent and
desiim as we have been.
1488 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
Mr. JoHANSEN. Would you feel that this need is also substantial
with respect to foreign personnel, particularly in this country ^ Visi-
tors in this country ?
]\Irs. CiiAPELLE. It has been my privilege to know a great many,
probably 50, personnel, both military and diplomatic, whose passports
are different from mine, who have come to this country for military
training. I knew some of them at Ft. Bragg and at Ft. Campbell.
I knew some of tliem abroad. I think if you gentleman were privi-
leged to eavesdrop on their private conversations — and because I have
been parachute jumping with them. I think tlie conversations are
conversations of great confidence — I think you would be interested
to know what they talk about.
They talk about how we eat ; they talk about how we live physically ;
and they find it very, very difficult to understand when I tell them
that if I go back to Washington, and I am privileged as I am today,
it will probably be possible for me to appear here and speak to you
w^ithout any particular fear of being called anything but a fool. These
are the conversations that they have ai'ound the campfires in Vietnam,
as well as on our field problems in their training.
The degree of curiosity, the degree of interest, the degi'ee of a
genuine desire to identify, not with us, but with the freedoms that
we enjoy, is tremendous, and we are not exploiting it.
T would answer on behalf of my South Vietnamese and Laotian
doughboy buddies — ^yes, the need is there, and the rewards could be
accordingly very great.
Mr. JoHANSEN. I may have some further questions in a moment.
INIr. Schadeberg?
Mr. Schadeberg. Well, first of all, I would like to say I appreciate,
and it is a privilege to have you here to give us the benefit of your
experience, and it is certainly appreciated by me and I know the rest of
the committee.
Mrs. Chapelle. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Schadeberg. Coming back to this country itself, do you have
any personal knowledge of the need for training of the private sector
of our citizenship ?
Mrs. Chapelle. With your permission, sir, I would like to answer
that in terms of my own profession. Correspondents are being sent
abroad in multiples, perhaps even of a different magnitude than they
were being sent abroad before. The age of the correspondent who
should at this time, I think, particularly in covering armed conflict, be
of great concern to us is — it is not the old retreads from World War
II, of which I am one. It is not even the correspondents particularly
who covered the Korean action. We are sending, because there has
not been a great deal of armed conflict to cover, people who have not
had the experience of covering combat before.
Some of the consequences of sending younger people without ex-
perience in the harsh realities of combat have resulted in situations
that are primarily ridiculous. They are funny. I did not believe that
any correspondent had actually sent a wire to Saigon, and I insisted
on being shown a wire, which read : '"Arrive 10 tomorrow morning.
Please arrange battle."
Mr. JoHANSEN. Arrange what ?
Mrs. Chapelle. "Please arrange batlle."
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1489
This is not a joke. I laugh, but I would prefer not to believe it, and
yet I assure you it is true. I don't know that the youth and relative
inexperience of some of the correspondents who are being sent on for-
eign assignments result in quite such funny questions in diplomatic
conferences as the attitude or such a tragic attitude as the one that I
cited to you, but I think it represents a tremendous problem. I am
speaking' in sympathy with those younger correspondents. I am not
speaking in criticism of them.
I tliink it is a tremendous problem for a yomig person to undertake
the interpretation of news from a distant country with the 30 minutes,
""Hey, boys, are your shots and passports in order? You are heading
for Timbuktu," that is a fact of life with our profession: and I
interpret the Freedom Academy, potentially, as a situation where we
will be helped with solving our problems, or when we get overseas, at
least, there will be better trained people to help us solve them.
I would certainly say that the information media would stand
solidly behind an exiucational principle on the simple grounds that we
both need it. I mean, both sides need it ; yes.
Mr. ScHADEBERG. Fine. Do you have anything in your personal
knowledge that would lead you to believe, for instance, that the U.S.
press has been influenced by the Reds? Or rather, manipulated. I
don't mean influenced.
Mrs. Chapelle. Right. I think, again, if I may, I would like to
cite the situation in Laos. "With your indulgence, I would like to pre-
tend for the moment that I am the Communist person in charge of
planning what can be done in Laos. I think what I would have said
to myself is, "Above all, we don't want to trigger a Korea-like reaction
in the United States. Now how can we take over this country by mili-
tary or other methods without triggering that reaction? Well, ob-
viously that reaction would be triggered only by the press. How can
we make sure they don't get in the act ?"
I would have said to myself, "Let's see. That's not much of a prob-
lem. Most of the people of Laos live beyond the jeepable trail. Most
of the people of Laos live beyond the end of the telegraph wire. There-
fore, if it is my job to take over the country, those are the people whom
I would control. That is the ground I want to walk over.
"And yet, because there is such tremendously little interest in the
United States about Laos — well, Laos is as far from the United States
as you can get" — you are even on geographically sound ground there —
"it happens that Laos is not of very much interest to the American, is
not very important to him. There are probably not ever going to be
more than, or until things get very, very hot, there won't be more than
three or four correspondents that will be covering it. and most of
these people have the handicap that they have to report every 24 hours.
That's just fine. We can win the war, as long as we fiirht it beyond the
jeep trail, beyond the end of the telegraph wire, and for the American
people, it -^^ill be like a hand before their face, because it simply won't
be ]:)jiyp)cally possible for them to see. Eyewitness coverage of what
we are doing simply will not be physically possible. The disinterest
of the American people cuts down the number of people available in
this country, and those people obviously have to report."
I don't think we have been manipulated directly to anywhere near
the extent that I have heard, including here. No, I don't; but cer-
1490 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
tainly in a case where part of one of the Communist conspiracies looks
to how we can be used or how the gaps in our coverage can be used to
serve their ends, they have been manipulating it very cleverly.
May I suggest that there are weaknesses in the Communist infor-
mation system, but because there isn't any Freedom Commission and
there isn't any Freedom Academy, we are not only not exploiting those,
but we cannot even imagine them, and again I would like to turn that
into an answer.
Their information system is much worse than ours. If we are going
to talk about how to exploit the weaknesses of an information system,
for goodness' sakes, let's find out what the weaknesses of their infor-
mation system are and manipulate them on those weaknesses.
Mr. ScHADEBEEG. My next question doesn't sound like it is too much
related to it, but it actually is. We hear reports — at least I do, of
course — that those who visit — you were in Vietnam, were you not ?
Mrs. Chapelle. Yes, sir.
Mr. ScHADEBERG. That those who visit in Vietnam, official visitors,
not necessarily Government, but perhaps some Government and
others — and this would go for the reporters as well
Mrs. Chapelle. Yes, sir.
Mr. ScHADEBERG — liave a sort of a lack of communication with the
people of South Vietnam, and that seems to be one of the difficulties.
The Communists, because of the type of war in which they are engaged,
have this communication. Do you think that the Freedom Academy,
for instance, would make up, at least in part, for this lack ?
Mrs. Chapelle. Well, I suggest tliat you put your finger most nearly
on the reason why I think we are sustaining the tremendous list of
losses that I said that I have seen. Yes, they do have communication.
No, we do not have communication, and if you have to make it a "yes"
or "no" business — which is not a proper answer in either case — it
would be that way.
Let me point out some of tlie difficulties of communication. Let's
say you come into Saigon with a great desire for communication with
the people of South Vietnam. And let's assume that you are not
satisfied that your taxi driver, your press officer, your postal clerk, the
people that you run into, are in communication with the Vietnamese
people. Were you to move — and it has been my privilege to spend —
well, I have covered 19 ambushes between Laos and Vietnam, so I
think it has been my privilege to do this, but the minute you propose
moving to where the people of Vietnam live, the villagers, way beyond
the end of the jeep trail or the telegraph line, the minute you propose
that, the first place you have to sell on the idea is the Government of
the United States. Because, obviously, the Government of the United
States is going to say, "Well, gee whiz, it isn't safe out there." Well, ft
sure isn't.
And the second point is, whether this is a reporter or a representative
of a private concern, what are we doing to control this? We can't
get you out. Obviously, they don't like to say that, and yet in the
5 weeks that I spent 40 miles beyond the Communist lines, in the village
of Binh Hung, I can understand what they mean. If there is combat
and the Communists are winning, they have to say, no, you can't get
that American out. If the village falls, obviously, the American life
is forfeit, the same as any other free world life on a fighting line.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1491
Whether or not, when you asked how is the Freedom Academy
going to help, that depends on the composition. That depends, I
would think, on the orders from the Freedom Commission, and cer-
tainly, if I had anything- to do with those orders, to those that go,
I would say, "If you want communication with tliem, you have to
share their danger." If you do share their danger, your presence
will be ultimately convincing that you really meant it, you really
wanted tliat communication.
But the people who go out there under the kind of orders which
frequently civilians, and even until the past year military personnel,
were under were unable by the nature of their orders to establish
communication.
At the time that I was jumping with the Vietnamese airborne,
there were four American advisers and myself doing it. I made
six jumps with them, and that was one year when I really felt that
I had earned my right to carry that wonderful passport that I carry —
not because of the work that I was doing as a reporter; sure, I was
proud of it; but simply because my country had been saying, "We
are backing you in the fighting," and nothing in the world had con-
vinced the paratroops that we meant it. Not their parachutes which
were marked "Made in U.S.A." and not their equipment which was
marked "Made in U.S.A.," but the fact that there were five of us who
were jumping with them. This was the thing that made the differ-
ence, all the difference in the world.
They then felt that our country, that our communication with them
was on a practical human being to human being level, and that our
country's pledge could be honored, and I might add that not any of
those jumps were as hairy as some that I made in training or even
one that I made a year ago on a training maneuA^er here.
The fact remains that communication is a problem and that the way
to do it, I say, must be a primary concern of the Freedom Commission
and the Freedom Academy. We have to sum up the objective, how
could we attain communication with these people, and that ought
to be it.
Mr. ScHADEBERG. One other question, and this may not warrant an
answer. In regard to the military personnel, do you think that they
might be — ^I don't loiow whether there is any lack of understanding
for the reason for being there, and so forth, but do you think that if
military personnel were trained, somewhat, through this type of Free-
dom Academy before they were sent in a situation like this, in this
case it isn't really a declared w\ar, that there might be a better under-
standing of the commission and a better understanding of what
really is involved ?
Mrs, Chapelle. I would like to qualify the witness in this case be-
fore I answer the question. There is probably no area of war cor-
responding that has interested me more than the coverage of the
training of American personnel in uniform. I have spent at least, I
mean, more time in the last 20 years on that subject than on any other
single one.
Less than a year ago, it was my privilege to ]um]:>, to which I re-
ferred a minute ago, on Exercise Water Moccasin, which I am sure
you gentlemen know is the final examination for military personnel
w^ho will bear abroad the really vast responsibility of being com-
1492 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
pletely cut off from any physical support and advising, and I say in
practice, leading — and I am proud of them when they do tliis, as I
say, this is no apology — foreign troops.
It is not my feeling that the increase in training, the most obvious
point to mvest in their training is that of political awareness. I have
been amazed and delighted, and I guess I am completely prejudiced,
because I have participated in it, in the degree of political awareness
that has come to many of these people in the course of preparing to
bet their lives on a situation in a foreign country. They do learn a
great deal about it.
I could certainly feel that a certain amount of ground work for
Freedom Academy courses has already been laid by the military, in
the absence of the Freedom Academy, having to teach tliese folks
before they go over there. They have brought in people from all over
to give a series of lectures which, were there a Freedom Academy, it
would seem to me it would be part of their curriculum, so I would
like to turn that one around and say that, yes, additional political
training is highly desirable. Highly motivated and skilled people are
ready to get it, they are getting a little bit now, which is quite interest-
ing to an observer. And I would certainly feel that there would be
everv' reason to include them in the program, with the extension of
many of the things that they are doing.
Their primary need, we will tell you, however, is in, well, language
and psycholog}\ If you ask them themselves, "What do you want
to know more about?" that would be their answer. I certainly think
that is part of it. I am just anxious not to be critical of what they
have been doing, because it doesn't deserv^e criticism.
Mr. ScHADEBERG. Thank you very much.
Mr. JoHANSEN. May I ask you one question off the record ?
(Discussion off the record.)
Mr. JoHANSEN. Do you want to ask any questions ?
Mr. Clausen. Yes, Mrs. Chapelle. You were here during my
testimony ?
Mrs. Chapelle. I was. I was delighted to be here, sir.
Mr. Clausen. And then also in recognition of our comments, I am
certainly pleased to hear your point of view, and I think that is as fine
a testimou}' as I have ever heard.
Mrs. Chapelle. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Clausen. For a number of years, I have held the conviction
that communication and transportation are the only vehicles with
which we can resolve some of our world's problems. You have more
or less substantiated this.
To carry this out, I found that communications by themselves are
supremely restricted. Number one, because of the language barrier
and, secondly, because they don't have the media, so then I come back
to the fact that transportation by itself, possibly, is the real key to get
back into these areas, so that you can implement any kind of a program
that you want to put over.
As a consequence, for some 15 years, I have had a flight training
program in a high school. I have expanded this now to a different
college, and I have a number of colleges, associated with a missionary
volunteer effort, that are going to be interested in this type of thing,
all designed to add to the ability of people that are going to be working
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1493
in these fields, the mobility and flexibility that only aircraft, be it rotary
wing or fixed wing, can use.
Now with your experience in these various areas, do you think that
I am on the right track ?
Mrs. Chapelle. Well, I am delighted to say that not only am I per-
sonally glad to know about this, but I would like to share, to speak
with you later about sharing some of it with my readers.
I would like to comment, however, that there have been times abroad
in recent years when I have come to exactly the opposite conclusion
about transportation. It has been my privilege to ride U.S. heli-
copters, on one assignment or another, into places which had never
seen any evidence of the United States before that chopper came in.
I am thinking of Lebanon and Vietnam, for example, and it has been
my privilege to work very closely with, and I hope to glorify the
tremendous bravery of, American fliers all over the world who have
gotten me out of more trouble than is imaginable, and yet I hesitate
to give you an unqualified affirmative, for this reason :
One of the barriers to communication that seems so tremendous to
me is this dependence on any kind of mechanical device. It is the
mere fact that you came into a village on an airplane or a helicopter
that sets you so far apart from the villagers that you have got a 2-
week — you are going to liave to live there for a couple of weeks before
you get to be their friend, whereas, if you just walked in— and on my
old legs, gentlemen, that gets to be kind of a problem every now and
then— if you just walked in, if you didn't come in related in their
minds to this godlike device, it would be easier. So let me go this far :
Wlien it comes to landing that aircraft 5 miles away from the village,
I am with you, sir. When it comes to letting me walk that last 5 miles,
it is worth it; and I would hope that the Freedom Academy would
evolve a method whereby we could have the virtues of the transporta-
tion without the barriers of mechanical devices.
Mr. Clausen. Well, along these lines, of course, I might add — and
this, of course, is for the record, and this is making a record on this —
part of our program is to see that those peoj^le who are going to be
fliers also have the ability to maintain the aircraft.
Mrs. Chapelle. No unimportant point. The photographs — the last
photograph I made in Vietnam, of which I am extremely proud, was
made because we didn't have proper maintenance. The' engine quit
over enemy territory, and the only reason I kept on taking pictures all
the way down was "because I thought I would be less frightened that
way. The fact that one of the pictures is good is a net gain for our
side, so to speak.
I think the maintenance abroad and the extension of the simplified
aircraft which can be maintained abroad is very important.
Mr. Clausen. Well, I am not talking about jets, believe me. I am
talking about something in the way of the Super Cub.
Mrs. Chapelle. Right. Nor am I, sir; nor am I. The word, the
jet — we don't have an extramilitary tactic yet, but I am sure when these
are evolved, as I am sure they will through the Freedom Commission
and Freedom Academy, that the jet will have very little part in the
critical flying abroad.
Mr. Clausen. Mr. Chairman, I was just going to say — well, if we
have no more time, I will conclude on this. I will be looking forward
30-471— 64— ,pt. 2 17
1494 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
to visiting with you on this; and, Mr. Chairman, I, too, would like
to visit with some of the members of the committee about some ad-
vanced ideas that I have.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Mrs. Chapelle, we have a quorum call and we are
going to have to cut this short.
Mrs. Chapelle. Yes, sir.
Mr. JoHANSEN. We appreciate your appearance, and your testimony
is very, very helpful to the committee.
Off the record.
( Discussion off the record. )
Mr. JoHANSEN. The committee will recess, subject to the call of
the Chair.
(Wliereupon, at 12 :25 p.m., the committee recessed, to reconvene at
the call of the Chair.)
(The committee reconvened pursuant to call at 12 :60 p.m.)
Mr. JoHANSEN (presiding). The committee will come to order.
The Keverend James Robinson. We are happy to have you here,
Mr. Robinson. We are sorry for the delay and the inconvenience we
caused you.
Will you give us a little bit of a background about yourself, your
education, and your current activities ?
STATEMENT OF JAMES ROBINSON
Mr. Robinson. I will, sir. I was educated at Lincoln University
in Pennsylvania and at Union Theological Seminary in New York.
I was ordained into the ministry of the Presbyterian Church in 1938.
I founded a church in Harlem and, along with it, summer camps for
underprivileged children in New Hampshire, a credit union, and a
co-op store, and I have been vitally involved in social welfare work
and agencies in the city of New York.
The background out of which I come to testify on this occasion
before this committee is the following: Because of the work I have
done with students here in the United States for over a period of 10
years on almost 600 or 700 campuses of prep schools and colleges and
universities and what I have been able to get them to do in building
this camp and in undertaking many other important activities, I was
asked by the Presbyterian Church to go around the world in 1951 and
loaned to anybody who wanted my services, such as the Minister of
Defense in those days in the Philippines, Ramon Magsaysay ; Chester
Bowles, who was our Ambassador recently in India; and to James
Flint, the religious affairs officer of the occupation forces in Berlin
in 1951, when the first great German youth conference. World Youth
Conference of Commimist young people, supposedly, was organized
in August of that year.
Since that time, I have kept up this worldwide interest and have
now developed an organization known as Operation Crossroads
Africa, which since 1957 takes a carefully selected group of tough-
minded young people to the African Continent, with the hope of mak-
ing an impact of faith and freedom. This year we will be going to
21 countries, and there will be 310. These were selected out of more
than 4,000 who applied, 3 of whom will be from the Military Academy
at West Point, who every year selects 3. They had 67 who api)lied.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1495
Now next year, they would like us to take five or six. We are not
sure that we can give them the increase, because everybody else wants
an increase, although we would certainly give them preference, if
we can.
This experience also led me to have many activities with Commu-
nists, or people who were related to Communists. In Berlin, my task
was to go over the Eastern Zone border into the East, as far as I could,
and get back safely. I went up to the Polish border. I talked to hun-
dreds of young people, some of whom mistook me for a Commmiist,
which I didn't mind, because that was the only way I could get the
information I sought.
I reported this back to James Flint. One evening in Eastern Berlin,
I stayed in the basement of St. Marian's Church, on what was to be
a good, safe conduct in case we were there at night and would have
been arrested by the German secret police. And in a confrontation
with about 75 young Communists, along with a number of other people
who were with me, my colleague was a young German Communist who
taught me a lesson. He carried a Communist Party card, but he actu-
ally was working for James Flint of the occupation people. That was
the first time I found some people who had learned to fight commu-
nism skillfully, because I said to him, "How come you have this card,
and you are also working for the Studentegemeinde, the Student
Christian Program, and James Flint?" And he said a very interest-
ing thing, a very simple thing, to me : "How do you know what you are
against if you don't know what it is?" He said, "This is one of the
troubles with you Americans. You try to fight communism with heat
and anger, rather than with light and intelligence."
He introduced me to hundreds of young Communists. After our
meeting in St. Marian's Church, 25 young people who had come to
that conference came over to the Western Zone, renounced their com-
munism and sought asylum.
I also learned that there were thousands of young people there who
weren't Communists. This was the first time they had a free trip any-
where. This was the first time they had been to a big city, and I said to
myself, "Wliat an opportunity if we had young people trained and
skilled who just came to a conference like this and did our own work."
When I came back and talked to many people in the United States
about this, I was shocked at the attitude that if you had anybody who
went to do that, they might be won over, instead of converting some-
body else. Now if that is true, then we ought to give it up right now,
because if that's true, they are going to win it anyway. I don't believe
that.
Well, when I came back, I worked with a good many people on a
number of projects. I protested strongly when we took away the pass-
ports of 41 young people who went to Moscow and Peking, not because
we took them away, but because that's all we did. We should have
known that every 4 years, just like right now, there is a big Commu-
nist World Youth Conference. It seems to me the smiple thing to do
is if you could send some people who are trained and skilled, you
could do a whole lot of work, because you could take advantage of a
lot of people who come who are no more Communists than you and I
are, but it is some kind of fear, for example, that kept us from making
a bold, creative strategy.
1496 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
When I came back from my world trip in 1952, I did two things.
One, for the old Mutual Security Agency, under Donald Stone, now
head of International Affairs of the University of Pittsburgh, I drew
up a little pamphlet with ei^ht other Negroes to help make a document
available for Americans gomg abroad on race relations. I saw people
from our Government, from education, professors from big univer-
sities, businessmen, whom you would call tycoons, ignorant, and I
must use the word "stupid," but the first thing anybody does is try to
corner them on American race relations. And it seems to me that the
simplest thing for us to have done would have been for every person
in the diplomatic corps, every businessman, every student, every pro-
fessor, even every missionary, since race relations is one of the great
tools used against us by the Communists, and to be sure, we give them a
lot of the racial failures on which to attack us, but on the other hand,
we haven't done our homework on the things that we could do to put a
simple document in the hands of every person going abroad which he
could be trained to use and which would help them to be intelligent
about the problem of American race relations historically and what is
happening now, constructively as well as destructively.
The thing that amazed me was I didn't find many people who were
constructive about this. All they did was to get angiy. I remember,
for example, at the University of Delhi, with the American consul
sitting down in the front seat, answering questions, for more than 3
hours, with more than 5,000 students crowded into that place, on com-
munism to be sure, but many more not on communism, but on race
relations — which partly had been inspired by Communists, using this
as a tool to embarrass us. The same thing in Lahore, Pakistan, but
worst of all, I heard a colonel in the American occupation forces in
Japan, at the University in Sendai, Japan, trying to answer these
questions, and literally booed off the platform. And I thought that was
a needless loss, and a needless victoiy for the young people who were
pushing him around like that, partly because nowhere did I find any
simple document, say a hundred or 200 pages, where they could have
had the basic material and information to use on the more positive
aspects of interracial achievement.
I wrote a little pamphlet called. Love of This Land^ which USIS
later had translated into about seven languages for distribution in
various countries. Then I wrote a little book called Tomorrow is
Today ^ which was published in 1954, in which I had a chapter on com-
munism dealing with our need to have a more creative, adventurous
thrust against it, instead of being defensive, waiting for it to win in
some area, and then trying to defeat or coimter it, or being entirely
negative and fearful about it.
Among the things I pointed out was that we really ought to be teach-
ing Marx and Engels, so that people who are going abroad can both
know it and fight it intelligently. I didn't find many missionaries, for
example, who Imew much about this. In the Cameroons, I saw our
mission young people and older people, too, defeated roundly and
soundly by young Africans who had come back from France, whose
minds had been captured by the leaders of Communist-dominated
French labor movement, the Committee Central de Travail, which
was Communist dominated, and which had a plan to win the mind of
every African student whom the French were taking to universities
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1497
in France. They got at them first, even though the government was
spending the money to take them there.
And one of the things I talked about when I came back was that
there was nobody among our missionaries or in our colleges that
we had built, or high schools, who knew enough about communism to
meet these young people intellectually on their own level. I speak
mainly of the Presbyterians, although at the time I'm sure most, if
not all, of the denominational and faith missions were no better.
As a result of that, I gave a sermon in the church of which I was
the pastor, and one young man, a graduate of MIT, decided that he
and his wife would go out and undertake that job. Their father —
this has no bearing on the record — did not speak to me since that day,
although he was the president of the board of trustees of the church,
because he said that I had destroyed his family and "sent them out to
God-forsaken Africa," but this young man and his wife went because
when the Communist group had tried to take over some of the young
engineers at Farmingdale, N.Y., at Republic Aviation, he organized
the group against them. They did a lot of study and prepara-
tion, and he was the right man to go, because he was a young man, he
knew youth, and who wins the youth and has the biggest influence upon
the minds of young people in Africa and the rising youth of Africa
are going to have the biggest influence in the long run of the future on
that continent.
Well, in that chapter, 1953, I pointed out a lot of these things that
I thought could be done, but there was no organization or agency to
do this. So when I started Operation Crossroads Africa, I knew from
my experiences that our yoimg people, when they got to Africa, were
going to run into this question again and again and again, and they
were going to meet with some of these yoimg people. Therefore, one
of the things we do in Crossroads is, when we select a young person,
we put them in a training course. Even though it is this semester with
all their school work, they have to work with approximately 25 books
on Africa. We indicate what books on Communist strategy they
should read and what books on race relations. They have to write a
15-page term paper for us that is due the 15th — that was just last
week — of May; otherwise, we don't take them. Nobody flmiks his
regular schoolwork because of this additional work. As a matter of
fact, they get better grades. They even take a language, learn a
dialect, so they can meet people at their own level.
We have had good success with this. It is a nonprofit group. We
raise all the money for it, but our big problem is we can't project a
program over a 5- or 10-year period, because a foundation will give
you money for 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, and you don't know if you are
going to get anymore money, and you need a good solid backlog of
assured funds to do this, which brmgs me to my own point of view
about how are you going to finance something like this.
I want to give my firm assent to the need for a separate Freedom
Academy, and not because the Army or the Navy or the State Depart-
ment give some orientation about and against communism in all their
institutions, but because the biggest asset this is going to have on
the thousands of non-Government people who go abroad. Every per-
son who goes out of this country is an unofficial diplomat, an unofficial
ambassador, and they are the people who can do a good deal more
1498 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
in the disarming way to get ideas of a faith and freedom across, for
example. But the big problem is who is going to train them and of
what will that training consist.
'V'Vlien the Presbyterians sent me out, they didn't give me any train-
ing. The first couple of months, I got beat all over the lot but I
learned, as a result of the experience, as to who was who, what was his
background, what was his strategy, how he tried to cleverly take over
the audience which came to hear me, and I could begin to spot that
pretty soon in meetings.
Their strategy was very clever. They would let me speak, and then
they would get the floor, and there might be as many as 4,000 students
there, but the Communists would get the floor first, and they would
pass me around between them like a football, and I kept saying to
myself, "Wliere are the Christians?" or "Where are the other young
people?" or "Who knows something about this?" So what we need is
an agency by which we can expose people to some kind of training on
various levels, and do this for Government personnel abroad. I am
more concerned, because this is my field, about the large number of
private groups.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Now may I interrupt right there at that point, so
that we have it in sequence? You have mentioned Operation Cross-
roads Africa. Would you just fill in at this point — and then resume
what you were headed toward — the basic purposes, objectives, and
operations of Operation Crossroads ?
Mr. RoBiNSON". Its objectives are several-fold. First, it is to make
a good impact and a good image for the United States in the new
countries of Africa. Secondly, it is to build a bridge of friendship
and understanding and to provide the young people who go with the
basis of new desire to educate themselves about the African Continent
in the hopes that we will build a reservoir out of which State Depart-
ment, the USIS, ICA, missions, anybody else, business, at work in
Africa can begin to draw a group of young people who have an under-
standing of Africa — not just some hearsay, but a feeling, who de-
veloped friendships, and who can go back after they have gotten their
education and work more effectively rather than just picking up
almost anybody as we have had to do before 1957.
We have opened 29 new embassies in Africa. We didn't have people
who understood or had a positive feeling about Africa, or who had
been there at the grassroots level to man all these engagements. Our
idea in Crossroads is that if we can get young people in their formative
years to go and build friendships, to get an understanding, and then
begin to pursue that — it is a long-range program of preparing a
capable, skilled leadership for America in Africa, and, needless to
say, we are way behind.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Let me stop you right there. Are these persons
who participate in this program persons from Africa in this country,
or is it done in Africa ?
Mr. Robinson. These are young people from the United States who
go to Africa on a short-term program on their vacation period, for
9 weeks.
Mr. JoHANSEN. I see. These are Americans that go to Africa.
Mr. Robinson. That is right.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1499
Mr. JoHANSEN. Now is the purpose of the program primarily for
their enlightemiient and education, or for that of the peoples in Africa
with whom they have contact, or both ?
Mr. Robinson. It is both, equal. One, that they have to say to
Africans, "We believe in you. We want to help you. We would like
you to see what we know and believe about the democratic way of life,
about individual initiative and responsibility."
Secondly, as a result of the experience, of learning and helping,
lasting friendships are made, a better impression of America is given,
and substantial assistance provided. Incidentally, we don't say it,
but the greatest benefit comes to us, to the United States, because when
they get back, they must make 50 talks each year for 2 years about
their experiences. Each one becomes an innocent, but unofficial, am-
bassador here at home. Over 70 of them are now in graduate schools
of African studies preparing for a lifetime of service in African-
American relations.
Peace Corps, which I sometimes humorously say ought to pay us
for building a reservoir, now has 100 former Crossroaders. Mr.
Shriver has a telegram at the door of every person who leads one of
our units when they return, saying, "Won't you come down for an
interview about service in Peace Corps after your experience in
Crossroads?"
Eleven of them have gone back. I say over 100 are back in Africa
already, with Peace Corps, USIA, missions, ICA, the Columbia-
London University teachers program in East Africa, and so on.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Are the Americans wdio participate in this program
biracial ? Are they both Negro and white ?
Mr. Robinson. They are both Negro and white. The trouble is
we don't get enough Negroes. The main reason is that eacli person
who goes has to raise a part of his own money, and the average Negro
student, if he can't work this summer, can't get back in school, let
alone to raise money to spend on Crossroads.
We have to go out and get more scholarship money to get help for
them, and also help to get them back in school, because it would serve
no purpose if they couldn't get back in school and continue their
education.
Mr. JoiiANSEN. But your foundation and other funds that you
raise go in part to subsidize those who can't pay their own way. Is
that correct ?
Mr. Robinson. That is correct. The students themselves raise about
$180,000 a year, as evidence of what they believe is their responsibility,
and then secondly, I and the members of the board of directors, we
raise about $310,000 a year, to supplement what they raise.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Is this basically a Presbyterian project, or is it
interdenominational ?
Mr. Robinson. It is nonreligious.
Mr. JoHANSEN. I see.
Mr. Robinson. We take everybody. Even an atheist who can con-
vince us that he believes in people and believes in us, and is not trying
to convert somebody, can go. We have a number of Catholics. For
example, at Georgetown is one of our cooperating institutions, the
rector. Father Bunn has provided $1,000 for the students, and the boys
at Georgetown have washed cars on Saturdays to raise money to help
1500 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
themselves go, so we are a broad, inclusive program, with no religious
test. I happen to be la Presbyterian minister, but we have Jews,
everybody in it who is devoted to freedom, democracy, and better
world relations.
Mr. JoHANSEN. I didn't mean to divert you. This is a fascinating
narrative.
Mr. KoBiNSON. Well, our other aim and objective is that we will
make such an appeal to young people in Africa that they will ask
us back to share in the development of their programs, because they
feel this kind of confrontation with what we have to give can help
them to develop whole democratic understanding, and can also help
both us and them to outmatch what Communists do.
The Communist goes to these countries to try to make people believe
they are their real friends, that they have come to share with them,
that they alone want to see them advance. But we have to outmatch
that. We can outmatch it. We have more invitations than we can get
money to send students. We have invitations this year for 47 groups.
We can only take 26 groups, because there just aren't enough funds
to do it.
Now our other aim and objective is that it is our hope that these
young people, as I indicated before, when they are through college,
will have laid a foundation upon which they will be better witnesses
for the United States in carrying out policy and developing friends,
and communicating the whole democratic structure, and being able
to combat communism intelligently and effectively when they come
to their maturity.
We feel we have to start now. 1 wish, for example, that if there
were a Freedom Academy, that they could help us in the training of
our young people each summer in the aspect of what do you do about
commimism; what is it? How do you determine who is a Commu-
nist, skillfully ; how do you deal with Communist strategy, etc. ?
How do you answer their questions? How do you keep a little
handful of them from taking the audience away from you? That
is what happened to me in northern Italy, for example, in the begin-
ning, and in France. When I first went out for the Presbyterians
who were naive about this for they gave me no preparation and my
Communist opponents took the audience away. Till I learned their
ideology, the content, and their strategy, I couldn't even begin to
operate, or they would ask a question, for example, if I may take the
time, like in the University of Tokyo, Japan, "They sent you out here,
you must be an important man. Could you be President?"
Well, I had to say, "No, I don't think I could in the foreseeable
future. It is not likely that a Negro would be President now." If
I answered the other way, I was sunk. They had me trapped. This
is what they were expecting me to do. But then once I could isolate
who they were, then I would know how to answer, and finally, after
some jockeying, I would say, very simply, "No, I don't think I could
be President, but sometimes, I have seen Presidents elected in my
country that I was sorry for, because I think I could have done a
better job," and the whole audience laughed and they laughed at
them, because then they saw the ridiculous nature of the question,
and then I could be much more constructive about this, and it was
only because I had begun on that 7 months facing them so often.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1501
trying to take my meetings away, or when I couldn't speak any of the
languages in India, sometimes a Communist was my interpreter.
That is a great act of faith, because after you get through, you
don't know what he has said, but I found out what he was saying,
but then I couldn't do anything, because that whole audience was
gone, you see, and it made me look bad.
Well, it is in this area that we need some agency that can help
all of us with these problems and, may I add, opportunities. More
Americans are going abroad. Most of them are naive about com-
munism. They get these questions, they get angry, and you lose the
audience when you get angry, and that isn't what you want to do.
You want to win the audience, or you want to make as much capital
as you can to get your point of view across, but you have to be
skilled and trained to do this, because we are combating a whole new
kind of unrelenting, ideological war.
And this is why it needs to be on its own. It does not need to be in
the State Department. They have got their problems. It can be
helpful to the State Department in some of the things they do, and
some of the people they send. It could be helpful to the Army, the
Navy, the Air Force, or to any agency representing the United States
abroad. But it needs to be an independent organization, so it can be
flexible and it can change its policy and its strategy as the time and
situation demands, and shouldn't have to go all the way up to the top,
for example, in an echelon of a secretary who is not basically concerned
about this problem, and take all that time, because we don't have a
whole lot of time.
I had hoped that back in 1953 and 1954, we could have gotten some
things done. What exactly ? In 1952, we didn't have any program in
America for the education of any considerable number of African
students. Down on East 17th Street, in New York, just east of Fifth
Avenue, there was a house known as the Council on African Affairs.
This organization used to get about $200,000 a year from Communist
sources. Its job : get a hold of every African student who came here
by mission, boards, or college and get a hold of his mind. Know
what his basic needs are; supply them in order to ingratiate him;
win him ; and if you can't win him — ^neutralize him. ^
I helped a lad' from Sierra Leone to go to the University of Denver.
The university gave him a full scholarship. I didn't know that Den-
ver was 5,000'feet elevation. Oh, I knew it, but it didn't make much
difference to me ; I didn't think too much about it. He comes out of a
country with a hot climate, and in the winter Denver is a cold climate.
He didn't even have an overcoat. Nobody else thought about it. But
the Communists did. Nor, for example, think much about the facts,
how lonely he was going to be and how desperately he'd latch on to any-
one who gave him friendship. Everybody else on the campus was too
busy. But not the leftists and the Communists ; they gave him friend-
ship and an overcoat. We've got a gold mine with foreign students
here, over 70,000 every year. If we don't make an impact on these
who are here 4 to 10 years, we deserve to lose them.
Mr. JoiTANSEN. And we are defeating the purpose of encouraging
them to come over here.
Mr. Robinson. Yes. And sometimes we spend the money and bring
them, and then somebody else wins their minds — like this young man.
1502 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
He became a Communist, and a part of it was that the Communists
were skillful enough to know, first, he needs an oA^ercoat, and they
gave it to him and, second, that he was lonely. Everybody else is
too busy, all the student organizations and the faculty, and here was
a guy who was lonely, and it is as simple as that, sometimes, and that
is what I have seen Communists do abroad.
The simple technique of getting to the people where they are, and
then getting inside them and winning their minds and making them
feel we are the people who really care, who want to be friends and
partners with them for a better country — a better world.
Well, it is in this sense that it would seem to me an Academy like
this could do great good for all the people in the United States, and
especially that great group increasingly who are going abroad, as well
as for the increasing number coming here.
Mr. SoHADEBERG. One question. Based on your experience with Op-
erations Crossroads Africa, do you think that the Negroes of Amer-
ica— are they any better accepted in Africa than the white personnel
who are sent over there ?
Mr. Robinson. I talked about that yesterday to a conference of
30 African cabinet members and staff functionaries up at Corning,
New York, who were brought here by Corning Glass. I talked
about it, because they asked me, first of all, and this was the question
the Africans were raising, "Why don't you send more Negroes ?" And
over and over again I have to say, as I have written on many occasions,
that we have in the United States with a highly color-conscious world,
not only Africa but Asia, a gold mine in American Negroes that
we haven't used very well. But more American Negroes would be
a great asset to American policy and aims abroad.
I serve on the advisory committee of the State Department on the
search for Negro personnel, and the last time we met was just about
3 weeks ago down here for 2 days. My point was that everywhere
Crossroads goes, if I don't have a good percentage of Negroes in
Crossroads in Africa, we have got trouble in that community.
Now we just need to have more money to get them.
Mr. ScHADEBERG. Why, why do you have trouble ?
Mr. Robinson. We have trouble because the first question they ask
is — and they are asking me this, this is what makes it so funny — "You
mean to tell me you are one of those people who doesn't want to bring
our people out here ? Do you discriminate against Negroes ? "
Mr. ScHADEBERG. Aren't they discriminating if they think only in
terms of their own ? I don't want to get into an argument but
Mr. Robinson. No, they are not thinking that for Negroes alone,
but you see, they have a great empathetic relation to American
Negroes- — who came from their coasts and they know our race prob-
lem and wonder why we don't use more of our Negro citizens — and
again and again, when leadership people are brought here by the
State Department, they are often very unhappy because we often fail
to associate them with the Negro community. Crossroads, in coopera-
tion with the Department of State, is bringing a group of 10 leadership
students from four countries in Africa this summer, and we asked
a Negro lad, a former Crossroader, to help take care of them.
If it is successful, we will make it 50 or 100 next year. The young
Negro who wrote me, whom I had asked to join my staff, would he be
one of the two leaders to take these around, because he speaks French,
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1503
and we have some French-speaking Africans, he can't go, but he said,
"For heaven's sake, please have at least one of the two people who take
this group around be a Negro," because I have run into so many groups
who are brought here by State Department, and they never have a
Negro to work with them or get to Negro homes. In our office, we get
Africans saying, "Look, we want to see some Negroes." This really
is ridiculous because most of the escorts are people who don't know
a thing about the Negro community or have no contacts with Negro
Americans. They are handicapped, and these people go back disen-
chanted with us because of this failure.
If I might just say one more tiling, I had to spend $75 of my own
money to cable back here from Kenya (where I was a guest of the
Kenya Government, of Jomo Kenyata, himself, because of the work
of our young people, which was why he invited my wife and myself),
because their Kenya delegation was coming to the United States
to become a member of the U.N., and Prime Minister Kenyata said,
"We need your help in seeing that this group gets to go to Atlanta
and to some other places where they can have some relationship with
Negroes and get to know more about the race problem and what is
being done about it."
So I took it upon myself to cable back to Roy Wilkins and Philip
Randolph and some other people, Whitney Young, to say that one of
the greatest things you can do, now that Kenya is independent, is to
make some good contacts of Negroes who can be of help to them, be-
cause they have this great interest. We have this reservoir of Negro
people, but we ought to make better use of them.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Mr. Clausen.
Mr. Clausen. Along this point, I was one of the Members of the
Congress that wrote the civil rights bill, sir, so that you know ex-
actly where I stand, but I have always felt in my own mind the very
point that you have just made here is that we could use this as a great
relief valve for the Civil Rights problem as it now exists in this par-
ticular country, if we were to take advantage of this so-called gold
mine of human resources that is available. Would you comment on
this?
Mr. Robinson. Well, this is one of the great problems among Ne-
groes, their desire to serve America in the world on the interna-
tional scene.
Mr. Clausen. I mean, couldn't we expand and take advantage of
this ? Couldn't we expand the opportunity for the Negro, not only in
Africa, but also South America ?
Mr. Robinson. South America and in Asia ?
Mr. Clausen. Yes.
Mr. JoHANSEN. And in Asia?
Mr. Robinson. And in Asia.
Mr. ScHADEBERG. I Want to ask a question that is directly related to
this Freedom Academy. You said something about you being in-
volved in two areas, the private and the governmental sector, inso-
far as Crossroads Africa and the Peace Corps, which is somewhat the
same work. Wliat would you consider to be the relative value of a
governmental agency for the Freedom Academy as opposed to a pri-
vate agency for the Freedom Academy, or a second part of that ques-
tion is: Who could you think should be sponsoring it, or should be
cosponsoring?
1504 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
Mr. EoBiNSON. Well, right off the top of my mind, I have to say-
that inasmuch as you have a Defense Department because sometimes
you have to defend the survival of the countiy by military actions,
you have now a worldwide attempt to remake the world m tlie very
evil image of what Archibald MacLeish once defined as, "Communism
is the fraudulent justification of the most heinous of means to achieve
the most despicable of ends."
That is a big thing; it is a worldwide thing. I don't think any-
body can do that, can be big enough and have the support that it
needs, but the Government, because we can be defeated more resound-
ingly ideologically tlian we can even by military action, which is what
I don't think the Communists want to try to do now.
Mr. SciiADEBERG. Would there be any advantage in having a pri-
vate sector contribute ?
Mr. RoBiisrsoN. I think very definitely. I would hope that private
organizations that are concerned would have a very real part in this,
because, after all, they are the majority of the people going abroad all
the time.
Mr. JoHANSEN. What you say, then, when you speak of the impor-
tance of Government support, doesn't close the door or preclude the
role of the private sector ?
Mr. Robinson. Absolutely not. I would hope that it would be a
real large place for private organizations to share in such a program.
Mr. JoHANSEN. I mean, your o-svn dedication to Crossroads is proof
that you are committed to the private-sector approach very strongly.
Mr. Robinson. Yes. I think we need both. I am committed to the
private structure, because sometimes the private organization can
move with greater speed, less suspicion, and greater depth. When
there are difficulties between our nations and some other, that door
doesn't keep us out. For example, our best relationship is in Ghana.
We don't have to pay for room, board, or transportation in Ghana.
Now, everybody thinks this is odd, and I wonder about it myself,
too, but they know what we are and who we are, and when they are
difficulties with our Government and Ghana, for example, we don't
have any at all.
And I think if the door is open, keep your foot in it. That is why,
when the newspapers came out like the Dally News and said, and I
quote them, "We should pull our Peace Coi-ps people out of Ghana
before they are killed, stewed, and eaten," that doesn't win friends for
us anywhere in the world, and newspapers sometimes could use a little
understanding of how you fight this battle. It wasn't what the Ghan-
ians thought about this that disturbed me. It was what the Nigerians
thought, who are strong friends of us, and they resented that, for ex-
ample, although they knew it wasn't our Government policy.
Well, I don't share with that. I think if the door is open, you keep
your foot in there and you keep somebody in there. No matter how
high the price or how hard the difficulties, somebody has got to stay
in there with the ideas that we believe are worth standing for, also
worth dying for — although I want to see more people stand for than
die for them.
Mr. JoriANSEN. Let me ask this question : Wliere the Peace Corps is
obviously a Government agency and is, therefore, open to the attack,
however baseless, that, after all, this is an arm of State Department
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1505
policy or United States policy, is the organization such as you repre-
sent, because it comes from non-Government background and with
nongovernmental support, less subjected to the charge, particularly
by Communists in tiiese countries, or is it more difficult for the Com-
munists to pin the tag of agents of imperialism or capitalism for the
United States Government on the private enterprise type of group?
Mr. Robinson. It is more difficult for them, although I must admit
they try to do it, to pin a label on Crossroads. They try to do that to
us, for example, try to make people believe that we are really are a back-
door Government-sponsored organization and that all this business
about private support doesn't avail very much, but we have been able
to effectively counteract their attempts.
Mr. JoHANSEN. The truth doesn't bother the Communists.
Mr. Robinson. It doesn't bother them. What we have to do is to
convince the people they are trying to convince, and we have been
able to convince the people they are trying to con. There is no
country we have been in, although in Uganda and Ghana they tried
to make it look as though we were CIA agents or an organization
trying to subvert their youth, but we were able to defeat them at it,
and in both countries, they have asked us to bring two or three groups
a year.
We can only take one group to each country despite all they did,
so it is those people, the masses of people whom we want to convince,
and we can keep doing that, and when you say to people, these stu-
dents raised this money, this Kiwanis Club, this temple or synagogue,
this church, this Rotarian Club, this group of students help make our
work possible out here, that speaks for democracy with a witness that
nothing else can controvert.
Mr. JoHANSEN. What specific type of activities do these groups of
yours pursue in these foreign countries ?
Mr. Robinson. We use the work camp technique as a vehicle to
be able to talk, to live with, and to get people to listen to us. This
year, for example, we are going to build eight little two- to five-room
schools in a village where there has been no school.
We are going to do a rural health project in preventive medicine,
with three doctors and eight nurses in eastern Nigeria ; and from Tufts
University, we are taking 12, at least, students to do a youth and
sports and physical education program.
Everybody wants athletics. They want to train for their African
games and the Olympic games. In Mali, which has just admitted us
for the first time — Mali never let us in before because they didn't be-
lieve we were a private organization — we have a project this summer;
we have convinced them. They want, for example, four coaches and
a basketball team. Five countries wanted a basketball team. Some
people we go to for money laugh at me, and they say, "It's a waste
to send a basketball team,"
Look, you send a basketball team, you will be having an opportunity
to talk to every youth in the country, and you are not playing basket-
ball all day; you are sitting around the fireside of the evening and
communicating ideas of democracy, faith, and freedom.
You are going to look at a new dam site, for example, or you are
going to talk to a chief of the village or the head of the political
party or the opposition leader, and this is where we get our chance to
1506 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
get across our ideas, and then they come back again and again with
questions, and the discussion deepens.
I would say, sir, that over 10,000 letters a year flow now between
the young people in this country and young leaders in the African
countries, so we use this as a vehicle, you see.
We give a service, we say, "We have come to serve you. This is
what the democracy is. It comes from within committed people, who
are not sent, but who believe this is their duty and responsibility, and
then it comes outside, and it changes other people, because they begin
to believe in you. This is our greatest opportunity."
Now, out of that, we have gotten yoimg African leaders to begin
to take responsibility they never took before. When we first went,
we had 62 in five countries. We got less than 30 African students to
come and work with us.
They would folk dance with us, talk about Little Rock, argue about
race relations, about labor, but they wouldn't work, because they were
the elite. If they were in high school and college, and you didn't
touch anything with your hands. That was beneath them. But it in-
terested them, why students would come all the way from the United
States, pay their own money, give up their vacations, and live in a
village under primitive conditions and avoid the cities.
We take them out into the villages, under the most primitive con-
ditions, and we tell them, "If you're not tough enough, you can't go
with us, because we promise you dysentery, we promise you some
malaria. It won't hurt you if you follow our rules, but you are going
to get all of these things. Sometimes, you are going to say to your-
self, 'Why did I ever let that fellow Robinson get me out in a place
like this?' " But we also promise you will be there at what Tillich
calls the Kairos, where time enters eternity, and they are a part of
the forces helping make good history of a better, more secure, more
peaceful, and a more democratic world.
Mr. Clausen. You have made a very key point here, I think, and
that is that we have the maximum flexibility, because of the fact that
you are operating in a private sector. Could you comment on the
restrictions that anyone associated with the public sector will have,
in operating in this same environment ?
Mr. RoBiNSON". Yes, I can.
I would say, let's take Peace Corps. I serve as a member of the
Advisory Committee, the National Advisory Committee — in fact, as
one of the four vice chairmen of the National Advisory Committee —
and I did a survey for Peace Corps, to see what was the reaction of
Europeans, expatriates, the Government people, the opposition party
people, the Communists, student leaders, and so on, 2 years ago,
which I sent back to the headquarters here in Washington.
Now, the difficulty with most Government agencies working abroad
is that they have to get an appropriation from Congress. If I may
be completely frank
Mr. JoiiANSEN. That is why we value your testimony. Be perfectly
frank.
Mr. Robinson. And it has got to be set up, and rules have got to
be set for it, and then I find so many people have to say, "What is
Congress going to think?" First, let me give you an example. The
United States Foreign Service made a film for us, beautifully done.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1507
They took some scenes of our students talking about politics with
Jomo Kenyata ; Julius Nyerere, the Prime Minister of Tanganyika ;
and with Tom Mboya about race relations, and they are making this
film, in color, on which they spent thousands of dollars, translating
it into French, Arabic, and Swahili, as well as English, to show that
dynamism of American democratic young people, but they took all
of the conversation on politics and the confrontations on race rela-
tions out, rightly or wrongly, because they said, "This might be an
offense to Congress."
Now, I think this is stupid, myself, that they even think this. I
said, "Why don't you put it in, and let's see what comes afterwards?"
Because you can't talk to African groups unless you talk on these terms.
Wliat did the film turn out to be, a beautiful travelogue in color, girls
carrying cement blocks on their heads, but we wanted to show them we
were concerned about their future, and that is where they are now,
deeply involved in political development and independence and vitally
concerned about American race relations.
Mr. JoHANSEN. Now, a private program could have done that.
Mr. Robinson. Yes. We did do that, CBS, the first time we got
into Guinea in 1960, when our Government had bad relations with
Guinea, they didn't like us and we didn't like them, but we got in.
CBS then promised them $4,000 to help build a building so that
they could get in, and Ed Murrow's last "CBS Reports" was ^'-Opera-
tion Crossroads Africa^ Pilot Project for Peace Corps,''^ but in that
film, there was confrontation with the villagers about race relations,
confrontation with Sekou Toure about American relations with
Guinea, for example, which we could do, and they did, and it is a very
powerful film.
Mr. Clausen. What you are saying, then, sir, is that there are al-
ways going to be limitations in any program associated with Govern-
ment, whereas, you have a minimal amount of limitations if the
emphasis is placed in the private sector. Is that correct ?
Mr. Robinson. That is correct. But the big problem here is that
no private agency can raise the money necessary to do the job that has
to be done.
Mr. Clausen. All right. Will you yield on that point? After
hearing your testimony, and I think we have hit, Mr. Chairman, on a
very key point. It is conceivable that we will have to develop a part-
nership program between Government and the private sector with
incentive for the leadership of our private sector to move out and do a
better job than they have been doing, but in the meantime, show the
Government interest and a matching program, possibly.
Mr. Robinson. I think we can be creative enough to get the maxi-
mum amount of using both Government and private agencies. Wlien
President Kennedy, former President Kenned}^, announced the Peace
Corps, he said, "There will be a place for the Government service,
there will be a place for Crossroads, there will be a place for colleges
and universities." My biggest quarrel with Peace Corps is that it
became another bureaucracy, and didn't leave enough room to do pri-
vate contracts. I want to add, however, the Peace Corps is doing a
magnificent job.
If it is going to do an educational project, for example, why not get
the education department of a school of education to do it in a coun-
try ? They are beginning to do a little of that now.
1508 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
They had a whole section on contract with private agencies, but that
has been pulled in, until it is almost nothing now, so that they could do
creative things in a more reflective way if they could set the standard
and the rule and say to this agency, "You do this job. We will not
supervise it, but we will check you every 6 months or a year."
Mr. JoHANSEN. Off the record.
(Discussion off the record.)
Mr. JoHANSEN. I would like to express my appreciation and, I am
sure, of my colleagues for your appearance here and your testimony.
I hope some of us can avail ourselves of the opportmiity of talking
with you personally when you are in Washington.
Mr. RoBiisrsoN. I will be delighted.
Mr. JoHANSEN". And possibly there may be further opportunities to
appear before the committee, but we do thank you for appearing.
Mr. Clausen. Mr. Chairman, could I ask one question for the rec-
ord, before the gentleman leaves ?
Mr. JoHANSEN. Surely.
Mr. Clausen. Because I have been developing the matter of utiliza-
tion of aircraft. I don't know if you were here or not when I made the
point with the previous witness about the implementation of, or the
use of, aircraft in these remote sections of Africa. Could you use
this in your program to expedite the Operations Crossroads in Africa ?
Mr. Robinson. I don't want to be ambivalent about that. Our larg-
est expenditure is getting 310 people to Africa. We sometimes have
thought about the possibility, and the superintendent of the West Point
Military Academy actually took it up with somebody in the Air Force
about the possibility of their flying us over. The $220,000 we spend
on flying them out by jet, even though it is cheaper than commercial
fare, could double the number of people we are working with in many
places.
Mr. Clausen. The point that we are making is that transportation
of qualified people into the area is one of the greatest needs.
Mr. Robinson. Absolutely. It is the biggest expense.
Mr. Johansen. We will release you now to take your own aircraft.
Mr. Robinson. Thank you. Thank you verj^ much, sir.
Mr. Johansen. The committee will stand in recess subject to the
call of the Chair.
(Whereupon, at 1:40 p.m., the committee recessed, to reconvene at
the call of the Chair.)
AFTERNOON SESSION— WEDNESDAY, MAY 20, 1964
(The committee reconvened at 2:25 p.m.. Representative Richard
Ichord, of Missouri, presiding.)
Mr. Ichord. The meeting will come to order.
This meeting is a continuation of the hearing on the Freedom
Academy bills.
The next witness is Mr. Walter Joyce.
Mr. Joyce, it is a pleasure to have you before the committee. I wish
to apologize that the other members are not here to hear your testi-
mony, but we do have some important legislation on the floor of the
House today, and a vote is expected at any time. I do hope that we can
conclude with your testimony before the bell rings.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1 509
I would ask, sir, that you give us a brief sketch of your background
for the reporter before you get into your testimony.
STATEMENT OP WALTER JOYCE
Mr. Joyce. Mr. Chairman, I am managaing editor of Printers'^ Ink
Magazine.^ the weekly news magazine of marketing and advertising,
and I am also the author of a recently publislied book called The
Propaganda Gap. A continuing analysis of the media of communica-
tions and the use of persuasive communications in the world of busi-
ness is my vocation.
A continuing study of the use of the persuasive communications in
the international conflict of ideologies is my avocation.
My testimony will be brief.
Because of my specialized background and experience, however, I
trust I can cast a little light from a slightly different angle on the need
for the Freedom Academy.
Knowledge in a vacuum is like an unopened telephone book. Ap-
plied knowledge gives birth to new intelligence. That is why every
major enterprise today is, first of all, a consumer of ideas and facts.
Business draws its operating knowledge from virtually every intel-
lectual discipline. It employs sociologists, anthropologists, econo-
mists, psychologists, semanticists, philosophers, researchers, and
practitioners of all of the creative arts.
It is the meshing of these disciplines that adds much to the dynamics
of business today.
Until this century the meshing was accomplished on a haphazard
basis. Then came the business school and the era of the management
generalist, who orchestrates the many disciplines into an operational
approach, knowledge is converted into something. There is a con-
stant quest for more and more knowledge, and there is a continuous
feedback on the effects of the operational approach so that it can be
refined and refined.
This is not being done in the ideological struggle. There is no
repository of pertinent knowledge from all of the disciplines. There
is no faculty interpreting that knowledge in terms of the needs of the
cold war, as the faculties of business schools interpret knowledge in
terms of the needs of the business world. There is no school turning
out the generalists, who orchestrate the bits and pieces of knowledge
into an approach that fits the needs of the immediate situation.
During World War I there was concern because we were training
some of our soldiers with broomsticks instead of guns, but we did
arm them with guns before we sent them to battle. Now we send
out our cold warriors to the battlefront armed figuratively with
nothing more than broomsticks. If our military academies can turn
out well-prepared warriors for a hot war, there is no reason we cannot
have an academy to turn out fighters for the only war we are in.
At this point may I make a special plea that the training be extended
to as many citizens of other countries as possible. Common sense,
of course, would tell us that nationals can influence their fellow citi-
zens to a greater degree than outsiders can, but the differences may
be more pronounced and more variated than is appreciated. This
has been learned through hard practice by the United States adver-
30-471— 64— pt. 2 18
1510 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
tising agencies that have expanded abroad. Our advertising
techniques are effective in other countries, but tliey are most
effective when adapted by tlie nationals of those countries. That is
why most foreign branches of U.S. agencies are staffed from top
to bottom with nationals or near-nationals.
I believe you have been hearing a sufficient number of arguments in
favor of training Government foreign affairs personnel in the Freedom
Academy, but that bill also provides for special courses for people
from the private sector of our society. Let us give full weight to
the value of such courses.
Some 35,000 American businessmen work in other countries. That,
I believe, is more than the total number of State Department, US I A,
and AID personnel abroad. These businessmen generally remain
in the host countries longer than Government personnel. For ex-
ample, the minimum tour for USIA personnel in one country was
changed from 2 to 3 years just recently.
American businessmen often have a wider range of direct contact
with local businesses, local citizens, and can do more by word and
deed to influence attitudes. These men now must learn on the job
how to cope with the conflicting ideological forces.
Many go abroad without the background needed to meet the chal-
lenge, yet imagine what exponents of our economic system and our
total society American businessmen abroad could be.
The anthropologist, Ethel J. Alpenfels, has observed that the travel-
ing salesman has been the most effective builder of civilizations. She
has recalled that in the Aztec kingdom the traveling salesman rated
a special heaven alongside of women who died in childbirth and
men who died in battle.
"If we look at the West," she has said, "it is not the Government
official who most changes people, nor is it the missionary, it is the
trader, traveling salesmen, businessmen who followed. The ideas
of our country come through the products we sell."
Yet, it was not until 1961 that the USIA took the first halting
step toward enlisting the help of U.S. business; through its office
of private cooperation, the USIA distributes kits of background
information on our Government's positions to some 450 international
firms, which in turn distribute the kits to their overseas employees.
Wliile this, of course, is an admirable effort, it is just a halting step
by an agency that was not even established to do a training job in the
private sector.
American businessmen abroad are generally keenly conscious of our
engagement in the ideological struggle and many think that Govern-
ment is falling down on the job. To take up the slack to some degree
they have formed such organizations as the Business Council for In-
ternational Understanding, the U.S. Inter- American Council, the Na-
tional Foreign Trade Council, the Pan American Society, the Latin
American Information Committee, and innumerable others. Their
activities vary, but their objectives all include a deeper commitment
to the ideological conflict. Some are outright propaganda organiza-
tions. The Information Council of the Americas in New Orleans, for
example, tapes programs on Communist perfidy and distributes them
to Latin America. With Government guidance and endorsement,
highly significant programs can be developed in the private sector.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1511
We already have CARE, the Congress for Cultural Freedom, the
International Rescue Committee, and the People-to-People Program.
Then there is religion, another antithesis to communism. The Na-
tional Council of Churches reports there are some 33,000 U.S. mis-
sionaries in 146 foreign countries and territories. American church-
goers support them with $170 million a year in contributions.
Private corporations and foundations are also active. Overseas, the
Ford, Rockefeller, Near East, and other foundations are spending
some $40 million a year on research, scholarships, and economic de-
velopment.
It can be said without much contradiction that these efforts are not
tied in with the ideological objectives of free men as closely as they
could be with enlightened guidance. We don't have the enlightenment
because we have not applied our resources to the problem.
The appalling fact is that the resources and the talents are avail-
able but there has been no real move to conscript them.
At the heart of the question are ideas and the ability to win true be-
lievers in those ideas. We, our country, has just a few basic ideas,
primarily that the freedom and dignity of each individual are in-
violate and to recognize that principle is to benefit all mankind. It
has worked for us and for many others in the free world. Yet those
ideas are seriously challenged by fraudulent promises. It need not be.
This Nation possesses the resources of persuasive communications in
such quantity and quality that we could turn the Communist siren
song into an ineffectual moan. Our technology in transmitting sound,
pictures, and printed word is unmatched. Our capacity for producing
communications media is without parallel. Our command of the
methodology is unchallenged.
Thanks to our leadership in the field of electronic computers, our
capability to assemble information and process it to meaningful com-
munications ends is unlimited. And thanks to our open, competitive
society our fund of creative talent in the art of persuasion and the use
of all media is abundant.
While Government, through the Freedom Academy, could provide
guidance, it could also employ the services and other elements of the
private sector.
For example. Government could engage one of the great organiza-
tions in international communications to conduct intense studies of
political attitudes throughout the world — and to analyze the facts,
concepts, and ideas that have shaped, and could reshape, these atti-
tudes.
Government and business together could conduct studies to deter-
mine the most progressive and promising policies, in the terms of cold
war objectives, for business in each area of the world.
Government could turn over the findings of the attitudinal studies
to one or more of our major communications agencies for the devel-
opment of special projects. One special project could be the initiation
of ideas and approaches for dramatizing to the people of Latin Amer-
ica the treacheries of communism in Cuba.
Government could engage private-sector communications specialists
to analyze in depth the magazines, exhibits, motion pictures, radio
broadcasts, television programs, and other efforts by Government to
influence the peoples of the world.
1512 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
During the past few years few have delved more deeply into all of
the hearings, reports, analyses, speeches, and news stories on the ideo-
logical struggle than I have. Two impressions are predominant:
There is wide agreement that we have not really begun to commit our-
selves to the ideological struggle and there is endless haggling over
the kind of commitment because parochial preserves will be challenged.
You have the opportunity now to make the commitment. You also
are sophisticated enough to know that, if you do, if you enact the
Freedom Academy bill, a new balance in our foreign affairs structure
will be achieved. The striped-pants diplomat, with his polite govern-
ment-to-government charade, will enjoy less stature. Our aid pro-
gram will be administered with more attention to positive objectives.
It will be a new kind of foreign affairs, and some entrenched interests
will not like it. But I think I am speaking for the majority when I
urge, commit us.
Thank you.
Mr. IcHORD. Thank you very much, Mr. Joyce, for your very fine
testimony.
I was not present at the meeting this morning but I understand
that one of the witnesses advanced the thought that perhaps the Free-
dom Academy could be financed by private funds rather than by gov-
ernmental appropriations.
I rather believe that that idea was probably advanced by Represent-
ative Clausen, whom I had talked to earlier and he was in favor of a
private-financing approach.
For the record I would like to ask. Do you believe that that would
be feasible, that is, that fomidations and corporations could be relied
upon to furnish sufficient funds for the operation of a Freedom
Academy ?
Mr. Joyce. I think it is feasible to get funds, but it is probably an
unrealistic way to get funds.
I do not think that is the resolution of the problem right now. 1
think this should be an official Government program and it should
belong to all of the people. It should not be identified with business ;
it should be identified with all of us.
Mr. IcHORD. You are not advocating the Government set up the
Academy and then finance it out of private appropriations or private
funds, are you?
Mr. Joyce. No, I am not. I advocate that this be supported by tax
money.
Mr. IcHORD. You would prefer that it be supported by tax money
to make it a project of all of the American people?
Mr. Joyce. Yes, sir.
Mr. IcHORD. One more question. Do you believe that there is suf-
ficient awareness in the business community to insure that it could
be comited upon to support the Freedom Academy and take full ad-
vantage of all of its facilities ?
Mr. Joyce. I am convinced there is. One reason that I wrote the
book or started research for the book — my book. The Propaganda
Gap — was the increasing number of criticisms we got at Printers^
Ink of the United States position as a persuader abroad. As you
know, more and more business has gone abroad since World War II,
and particularly our communications agencies, our advertising agen-
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1513
cies, our marketing organizations. These are people sophisticated
in commnnications and inevitably they think our Government is doing
a poor job. A number of them have approached the USIA and offered
their assistance.
Mr. IcHORD. It is your feeling then that these people could attend
the Academy and be prepared to help their Government when they
are abroad?
Mr. Joyce. I am convinced they would ; yes.
Mr. IcKORD. The reason why I was not at the hearings this morn-
ing was that I am a member of the Conmiittee on Armed Services
and we heard Secretar\^ of Defense, Mr. McNamara, on the South
Vietnam situation and the Secretary at the hearing this morning—
of course, I cannot relate all that went on at the hearing, but he did
go over essentially the same thing that he went over in his speech
of March the 28th to the effect that we essentially had four alterna-
tives in South Vietnam ; he only mentioned three, but I could tell from
his testimonv pretty well what the fourth alternative was.
One, would be to go all out to win the war in South Vietnam;
second, would be to get out altogether; third, would be to do as we
are doing now; and the fourth, would be some kind of a neutrality
arrangement much like that in Laos. Of course, that would be out be-
cause we, in effect, have already had division in Vietnam, division of
North Vietnam and South Vietnam.
We cannot imder any circumstances pull out, I believe, because it
would open up Malaysia, the Philippines, Australia, all down the
line there to Communist advancements.
Of course, the Freedom Academy operating on a situation like
South Vietnam is too late.
Mr. Joyce. Yes.
Mr. IcHORD. Do you feel this Academy would have helped us in a
situation, say, 10 or 12 years ago in Vietnam ?
Mr. Joyce. If the concept worked, presumably we would have lead-
ership in South Vietnam — knowledgeable, free-world style leadership
that would have recognized the Communist threat a long time ago and
would have confronted it headlong.
I think also a commitment to the whole idea of the Freedom Acad-
emy would have meant that not only would South Vietnam be on con-
tention as it is now, but North Vietnam, too.
If we commit ourselves to the principles of freedom, we cannot ac-
cept the idea that what's theirs is theirs, and what's ours we will strug-
gle over. I think there is a conflict of ideas and our ideas would have
invaded North Vietnam. Our ideas would be more alive behind the
Iron Curtain than they are now.
Mr. IcHORD. You are thinking then in terms of a counteroffensive
rather than being on the defensive all of the time ?
Mr. Joyce. It inevitably would have to be that.
If we commit ourselves to the ideological struggle, it has to be that.
The Communists are totally committed to it; there is no letup, al-
though there might be an accommodation on the diplomatic level, there
is no letup to their commitment on the ideological level.
Mr. IcTiORD. Thank you very much, Mr. Joyce, for your testiniony.
The meeting will stand adjourned until further call of the Chair.
(Wliereupon, at 2 :45 p.m., Wednesday, May 20, 1964, the committee
adjourned, subject to the call of the Chair.)
1514 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION
STATEMENT OF LOUIS DONA O'HARA FOR THE TAXPAYERS
LEAGUE OP BLACKSTONE VALLEY, PROVIDENCE AND PROVI-
DENCE PLANTATIONS
(Subsequent to the May 20 hearings, the following statement was
received by the committee from Mr. Louis Dona O'Hara, president of
the League. It is hereby made a part of the record :)
P.O. Box 777
Pawtucket, Rhode Island
June 9, 1964
Honorable Edwin E. Willis, Ch.
Committee on American Activities
House of Representatives
"Washington
Dear Sir :
iThe recent death of Douglas MacArthur brings to light the value of dedicated
service gained for the nation. What motivated Douglas in his tasks? Wasn't
it the fidelity which emanated from his soul in early manhood during the con-
structive period of his life when he received the bounty of special talents from
Uncle Sam at West Point? Like other men such as Washington, Custer, Roberts,
Pershing, Bradley, Patton, Grant, Sherman, Bowie, Eisenhower, and many others,
he was expressing the sustaining force of his vitality to fulfill America's role
of leadership. In some of these cases, the aptitude is quiet and in others it is
vocal. The navy also has its heroes such as Dewey, Nimitz, Halsey, King and
others. The air has its men such as Arnold, Vandenberg, Spaatz, and Mitchell.
The list is long but it started in 1802 with a first national school through the
urgings of Washington and Jefferson. Long may it continue.
In analysis we compare what these men have done for Western Civilization
in the American sense in comparison to other nations when they wore the mantle
of leadership. We can say that Uncle Sam's investment in breeding special
talent has advantages beyond measure in the tally of history.
In all this there is one flaw and that is that the success gained was with mili-
tary arms with blood as the price. A true American sense has a separate quality
in that although we have victories for our flag, the measure of our glory was
blended with compassion as was ably expressed by Grant in returning Lee's
sword along with his horses. The Marshall plan was a form of compassion.
MacArthur's success in Japan after VJ Day was also the revelation of a com-
passionate heart.
Military might is necessary for it was fear of Caesar that brought forth the
200 years of peace for the Roman Empire. We, as Americans seek to duplicate
such an achievement of peace over a longer and indefinite term. We are seeking
an infinite tenure of peace. Atomic potential dictates the wisdom of such a
course. If such be the case, the leadership will come to "cold war" leaders
rather than leadership by force of arms. Caesar was fortunate in that the
weapons then were limited whereas now the weapons are infinite and limitless.
It is in the power of Americans to create a world of love that will bring forth
a grandeur and splendor greater than Rome. Prosperity could be achieved
without war economies. To create a world of love and charity which is dis-
ciplined towards mutual acceptance of dependency on one another without
avoiding responsibility. America now seeks unsung heroes. The challenge of
such a program is equal to victory in war. In this work, the glory is Jiot per-
sonified as it must be in the military art, but the achievement comes closest to
the great message of the Messiah who took advantage of Caesar's peace to do
his work. The christian message of our Messiah has lasted long and remains
with us.
You, the members of your committee have the opportunity to create civilian
heroes of peace and for these men the tunic of service shall be plain cloth as is
usually worn by civilians rather than the public image which the uniform must
represent. America needs both uniforms and tunics in the performance of its
future missions.
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1515
To create such talent, the Freedom Academy has been proposed. In my con-
sidered judgment, in the era of 1999, a graduate of this Freedom Academy will
probably perform a service for the Congress that will prove the merit of its
decision in creating same, and I recommend the bill's immediate passage.
My regards to all the members of your committee although I had a lot of
statistics to submit, I chose rather to submit this prepared statement for the
record.
I recommend immediate passage in this session of the Congress.
Respectfully submitted,
Louis Dona O'Hara, P.E.
President
INDEX
INDIVIDUALS
A
Page
Acheson, Dean 1052
Albertson, William 1062
Almond, Edward M 1297
Alpenfels, Ethel J 1510
Alsop 1408
Antonenko-Davidovich, B 1300
Arnold, Hap (Henry Harley) 966
Atkinson, James D 1082-1086 (statement), 1297
Ayub (Kahn), Mohammed 1412
B
Baarslag, Karl 1297
Bakunin (Mikhail) 1058
Ball, George B 958. 991, 1022, 1307
Barry, Robert R 1300-1305 (statement)
Batista y Zaldivar (Fulgencio) 907, 1048, 1335, 1377, 1486
Bavh, Birch E 1265
Bazhan, N 1300
Beech, Keyes 1455
Berle, Adolph A 1465-1483 (statement)
Betancourt, Romulo 1038, 1309, 1472, 1473, 1482
Biemiller, Andrew J 1056, 1063, 1064
Bobrakov, Yuri I 1283, 1298
Boehm 1071
Boggs, Hale 935
938, 967, 969, 1001, 1035, 1041-1046 (statement), 1056, 1071, 1265,
1315, 1354, 1378, 1380, 1425.
Bokshai, I 1300
Boone, Joseph 949
Bouscaren, Anthony T 1297
Bowles, Chester 1494
Bozhiy, M 1300
Braddock (Edward) 1230
Brandt, Willy 1038
Brewster, Daniel B 1265
Brundage, Avery 1073
Bryant (Farris) 965
Bukharin, (Nikolai I.) 1194'
Bnndy, McGeorge 1356
Bunn (Edward) 1499
Burke. Arleigh A 938. 942, 1022, 1082, 1420-1449 (statement), 1453, 1479
Butler, Edward S., Ill 1045
Byrd, Robert C 1265
C
Cabell, O. P 1198, 1199, 1207
Cannon, Howard W 1265
Cantril, Hadley 1211
Carey, James 962
1 Spelled Bukarin in this reference.
ii INDEX
Page
Case, Clifeord P 936, 954, 1046, 1055, 1264
Castro, Fidel . 997,
1042, 1045, 1048, 1076, 1084, 1293, 1300, 1309, 1316, 1335-1337, 1356,
1358, 1367, 1379, 1412, 1456, 1477, 1478, 1483, 1486.
Castro, Raul 1334-1336
Chamberlain (Neville) 1060, 1073, 1075
Chamberlain, William Henry 966
Ohapelle, Dickey 1483, 1484, 1485-1494 (statement)
Chaplin, George 1484
Chekanyuk, V 1300
Cherne, Leo 938, 1354
Chiang Kai-shek 997
Chou En-lai 1455
Churchill, Winston 1059, 1435
Clark, Joseph S., Jr 1265
Clarke. Phil C 1484
Clausen, Don H__ 937, 1031-1033 (statement), 1101, 1107, 1108. 1315, 1457-1465
(statement), 1467, 1473, 1480, 1492, 1493, 1503, 1506-1508. 1512
Clausewitz, Karl Von 1059
Clay (Lucius) 1354
Coblentz, Gaston 1484
Conley, Michael C 1385-1411 (statement)
Considine, Robert 1484
Copley 1350
Cunningham, William J 1087-1098 (statement)
Cutler, Robert T 948, 949, 966
D
Dabney, Virginius 1317
Dale, Edwin L., Jr 1485
Damrosch, Walter 1351
Dankevich, K 1300
Dawson (George Geoffrey) 1073
de Gaulle, Charles 996, 1300, 1412, 1469
de Jaegher (Raymond) 1196.1197
Delaney, Robert Finley 1319-1341 (statement)
de Leon, Daniel 1057, 1064
de Madariaga, Salvador 1038
de Musset, Alfred 1018, 1030
de Onis, Juan 1484
de Tocqueville, Alex 1059
Devine, Dwight 966
Dewey (Thomas E.) 1354
Dmiterko, L 1300
Dobriansky, Lev E 1279-1300 (statement), 1380
Dodd, Thomas J 936, 954, 963, 1055, 1264, 1317, 1353, 1367
Donovan (William) 1353
Dorkins, Charles 1484
Douglas, Paul H 936, 937, 945, 952, 954, 963, 1055, 1056, 1058, 1264, 1317, 1354
Drummond, Roscoe 941, 1053
Dulles, Allen 1235, 1357
Dutton, Frederick G 1053, 1181, 1187
E
Einaudi 1197
Eisenhower, Dwight D 952, 1306, 1355
Elegant, Robert S 1484
Emmet, Christopher 1351-1359 (statement), 1470
Engels, Friedrich (Frederick) 1062. 1084, 1496
Engle, Clair 1265
Ewan, Jim 1449
INDEX iii
F
Page
Fabian, Dr 1086
Fairchild, E. W 1485
Fall, Bernard F 1213
Fascell, Dante B 1417-1419 (statement)
Fedorenko 1294
Feuerbach (Ludwig Andreas) 1058^
Figueres, Jos6 953, 1037, 1038, 1309, 1472
Fisber, Jobn M 1297
Fleiscbman, Stephen 1484
Flint, James 1494, 1495
Fong, Hiram 936, 954, 1055, 1264
Fulbrigbt, J. William 1046, 1051, 1356, 1358, 1468, 1469, 1480
Funston, Keith 1355
G
Gailbraith, Kenneth 1475
Gallup, George 1242
Gitlow ( Benjamin) 1194
Gmyrya, B 1300
Gnatyuk, D 1300
Goddard 1382
Goldwater, Barry 936, 945, 954, 1055, 1264, 1317
Gompers, Samuel 1057, 1064
Gomulka ( Wladyslaw) 955
Gonchar, O 1300
Gonzales, Jose 1343
Goulart (Joao) 1316, 1358, 1467
Grant, Alan G., Jr 941, 943, 945, 948-952,
954, 965-1003 (statement), 1044, 1051, 1052, 1097, 1098, 1102, 1106-
1108, 1191, 1267-1269, 1271, 1288, 1309, 1319, 1353, 1357, 1435, 1463
Gray, Gordon 1226
Green, William 1074, 1351, 1424
Gromyko (Andrei A.) 1250
Grose, Peter 1439
Gruening, Ernest 1265
Gruson, Sidney 1484
Gubser, Charles S 935,938,967,1056,1315 1328 1333,1411-1415 (statement)
H
Halleck (Henry W.) 1061
Harrigan, Anthony 1297
Harriman, W. Averell 1060, 1249-1271 (statement),
1278, 1282, 1285, 1286, 1289, 1291, 1303, 1304, 1308, 1309, 1356
Hart, Philip A : 1265
Hartigan, William 1484
Hartman, Robert 1484
Hays, Wayne 1262, 1303
Hegel (Georg Wilhelm Friedrich) 1058,1229
Herling, John 962
Herlong, A. Sidney, Jr 935, 936, 937-965 (statement), 967, 969,
976, 993, 1001, 1042, 1043, 1056, 1247, 1302, 1313, 1315, 1329, 1466
Herter (Christian A.) 1184, 1188, 1190, 1262, 1264, 1266, 1268
Hevi, Emmanuel John 1079,1080
Hickenlooper, Bourke B 936, 954, 1055, 1264
Higgins, Marguerite 1455
Hill, Robert C 1316 (statement)
Hillsman, Roger 1054, 1060
Hindus, Maurice 1484
Hiss, Alger 1382
Hitler, Adolf 966, 1058, 1059
1071, 1073, 3075, 1351, 1358
^ Misspelled Feurbach.
iv INDEX
Page
Holmes, John Haynes 1353
Hook, Sidney 940, 955, 1302, 1353, 1357
Hoover, Herbert 1005, 1027
Hoover, J. Edgar 1197
Hoshi, Nobuo 1484
Howard. Jack 1350
Huberman ( Leo) 1312
Huffman, Rex 966
Humphrey, Hubert H 1265
I
Ikeda (Hayato) 1412
Inouye, Daniel K 1265
Ivchenko, V 1300
J
Jackson, C. D 1046, 1053, 1227, 1357
Jackson, Henry M 1052
Jagan, Cheddi 1102, 1103
James, Daniel 1195, 1196
Javits, Jacob K 1046, 1265
Jimenez, Perez 1472
Johnson, Frank J 1297
Johnson, Lyndon B 1439
Jones, Paul 1453, 1454-1456 (statement)
Joyce, Walter 1415,1509-1513 (statement)
Judd, Walter 937, 938, 952, 962. 963, 1001, 1056, 1313
K
Kadar ( Janos) 1452
Kalb, Marvin 1484
Kasiyan, V 1300
Keating, Kenneth B 936, 954, 1039, 1264, 1317
Kennan, George 1016
Kennedy, John F 953, 1039, 1046,
1052, 1088, 1266, 1306, 1355, 1357, 1358, 1408, 1435, 1483, 1507
Kennedy, Robert 953, 957, 976, 1051
Kenyata, Jomo 1503, 1507
Keogh, E. G 1449
Kersten 1287
Khanh, Nguyen 1439, 1440
Khrushchev, Nikita Sergeevich 955,
964, 1009, 1021, 1026, 1039, 1059, 1060, 1070, 1084. 1209, 1210,
1214, 1216, 1240, 1250, 1256, 1257, 1261, 1282, 1294-1297, 1307,
1308, 1311, 1354, 1355, 1357, 1358, 1387, 1403, 1404, 1452, 1469
Kintner. William R 1098,1106,1110,1206,1207,1292,1305-1313 (statement)
Kirilyuk, E 1300
Kissinger, Henry 1223, 1226
Kitchen, Robert W., Jr 987
Knight, John S 1343, 1350
Korneichuk, A 1300
Kornfeder, Joseph Z 1194, 1203, 1207, 1306
Korotich, V 1300
Kostenko, L 1300
Kozlanyuk, P 1300
Kuhn (Irene Corbally) 1197
Kuusinen, O. (Otto V.) 1194,1337
L
LaFarge, John 1353
Lambie, William K., Jr 1297
Laurence, William L 1485
Lausche, Frank J 936, 945, 954, 1264, 1317
Lawrence, T. E 966
Lee Kuan Yew 1038
INDEX V
Page
Lehman (Herbert H.) 1351
Leibing, Peter 1484
Lenin, V. I. (Nicolai) 950,
962, 964, 966, 1005, 1021, 1057-1059, 1062, 1064, 1065, 1069, 1077,
1084, 1191, 1193, 1194, 1198, 1204, 1212, 1213, 1215, 1226, 1256, 1257,
1334, 1337, 1387, 1396, 1401, 1408, 1411, 1412.
Leonhard, Wolfgang 1195
Lewis, John L 1057
Lodge, Henry Cabot 1439, 1440, 1458, 1459, 1462
Long, Edward V 1265
Long, Huey 1060
Lovett, Robert 1226
Lubin, Suzanne 1309
Luce, Henry 1354
Lyons, Eugene 966, 1357
M
MacArthur, Douglas 1366, 1378, 1514
MacLeish, Archibald 1504
Macomber, William B., Jr 1176
Mafifre, John 1441
Magsaysay, Ramon 1494
Maiboroda, G 1300
Maiboroda, P 1300
Maleter (Pal) 1355, 1358
Malik, Charles 1038
Malyshko, A 1300
Mann, Thomas (Tom) 1316,1346
Mansfield, Michael J 1265
Manuilsky,' (Dimitri Z.) 1194
Mao Tze-tung 949, 955,
966, 1059, 1200, 1226, 1337, 1354, 1357, 1358, 1398, 1445, 1452
Marchant, Pierre 1445
Marin, Munoz 1472
Markezini, Spyros 1047
Marsh, John O., Jr 1450-1453 (statement)
Martin, David 1353
Marx, Karl 962, 1058, 1059,
1062, 1071, 1077, 1084, 1198, 1229, 1256, 1258, 1266, 1281, 1337, 1496
Mateos, Lopez 1412
Matthews, Herbert 1477, 1478
Mayers, Henry 998, 1035-1041
(statement), 1046-1055 (statement), 1098-1102, 1105, 1106
Mboya, Tom 1507
McClure, William K 1484
McCone, John l 1044
McDowell, Arthur Gladstone 1055-1081
(statement), 1102-1105, 1108, 1354, 1357
McGee, Gale W 1265
McGiffert, David E 1189
Mclntyre, Thomas J 1265
McKee, Fred 1058, 1265
McNamara, Robert S 1439-1441, 1513
McNaughton, John T 1183
Meany, George 992, 1046, 1424
Methvin, Eugene H 940, 948, 1324
Meyer, Frank S 1193, 1201-1203
Mikoyan (Anastas) 962, 1084
Miller, Jack 936, 954, 1055, 1264
Milton, (John) 1030
Mitchell (William) (Billy) 998,1053
Molotov, Vyacheslaw M 1194
Monroney, A. S. Mike 1265
Morales (Jose) Ramon Villeda ( See Villada Morales (Jose) Ramon)
^ Spelled Manuelsky in this reference.
vi INDEX
Fag*
Moreell, Ben 1297
Morris, Robert 1297
Morrison, H. Stuart 1324, 1342-1350 (statement), 1360-1364 (statement)
Morse, J. H 1297
Morse, Wayne lt>^^
Moss, Frank E 1265
Mowrer, Edgar Ansel 1297
Mundt, Karl E 936, 937, 945, 952,
963, 1055, 1056, 1242, 1264, 1303, 1354
Murphy, Charles J. V 1484
Murphy (Robert Daniel) 1292
Murrow, Edward R 1188. 1485, 1507
Mussolini, Benito 1060
N
Nagy (Ferene) 1355, 1358
Neuberger, Maurine B 1265
Newsom, Phil 1484
Niemeyer, Gerhart 1274-1279 (statement), 1297
Nixon, Richard M 952, 1296
Nkrumah, (Kwame) 1020, 1079
Nowell, William Odell 1194
Nyerere, Julius 1979, 1507
O
Ochsner, Alton 1945
O'Connor, Daniel J 1377, 1378, 1379-1383 (statement)
O'Hara, Louis Dona 1514-1515 (statement)
Olson, Clarence H 1378-1379 (statement)
Orrick (William H, Jr.) 989
Osanka, Franklin Mark 1442-1449
Oshanin (D. A.) 1209
Oswald (Lee Harvey) 1102
Oswald (Marguerite) 1102
P
Panov (D. Yu) 1209
Papandreou (George) 1039, 1047
Paton, B 1300
Pavlichko, D 1300
Pavlov, Ivan 1204, 1205, 1210
Pennington, Lee R 1297
Perkins, James A 953,
989, 991, 1184, 1188, 1190, 1262, 1266, 1268
Philbrick, Herbert 938, 1365-1377 (statement)
Pidsukha, A 1300
Pineiro (Osada) (Manuel) (also known as Red Beard) 1486
Pliny 1030
Polk, George 1484
Poore, Charles 1483
Possony, Stefan T 951,
964, 966, 975, 986, 992, 1003-1031 (statement), 1067, 1106, 1195,
1223, 1228, 1297, 1320, 1322, 1330, 1357
Predmore, Lewis 1089
Proxmire, William 936, 945, 954, 1055, 1264
R
Randolph, Abraham A 1265
Randolph (A.) Philip 1^'>03
Red Beard (See Pinero Osada, Manuel)
Reuther, Walter 962
Revutsky, L 1300
Ribicoff, Abraham A 1265
Richardson, John Jr 1419 (statement)
Rickenbacker, Eddy 1366
INDEX vii
Page
Robinson, James 1494-1508 (statement)
Roca, Bias 1336, 1337
Rockefeller, Nelson 1039, 1306
Rogers, Helen G 1484
Romualdi, Serafino 1076, 1077
Rooney, John J 977, 983
Rostow, Walt W 991, 992, 994, 1052, 1053, 1098, 1101, 1357
Roucek, Joseph S 1447
Rubinstein, Alvin Z 1208
Rudenko, L 1300
Rusk, Dean 991, 1054, 1186, 1356, 1481
Rylsky, M 1300
S
Saltonstall, Leverett 1265
Sandburg, Carl 1074
Schiro, Victor H lOio
Schlesinger, Arthur W 1039-1041
Schoenbrun, David 1484
Schweiker, Richard S 935,
938, 967, 1001, 1043, 1056, 1243-1249 (statement), 1273, 1315
Scott, Hugh 936, 954, 1264, 1317
Scranton (William) 1296
Scripps, Charley 1350
Segni, Antonio 1412
Selznick, Philip 962, 1202
Sevareid, Eric . 1484
Shelton, C. N 1364
Sherman (Forest) 1421
Shevchenko, Taras Grigoryevich 1283, 1298-1300
Shriver, Sargent 978, 1499
Silliman, Charles V 966
Smathers, George A 936, 954, 1055, 1264, 1265
Smith, Howard K 1484
Smith, Lawrence 1292
Smolich, Y 1300
Somoza, Luis 1472
Sosyura, V 1300
Soto, Lionel 1323, 1324, 1333
Staats, Elmer 952
Stalin, Josef— 952, 1004, 1059, 1194, 1198, 1226, 1257, 1261, 1355, 1387, 140i, 1480
Stanton (Edwin M.) 1061
Stark, Leonard 1484
Stelmakh, M 1300
Stone, Donald . 1496
Stout, Ed 1484
Strausz-Hupe, Robert 1003, 1206
Stump, Felix B 1297
Sukarno (Achmed) 955, 1412
Suslov (Mikhail A.) 1083
Sweezy (Paul M.) 1312
Symington, Stuart 992, 1265, 1356
T
Taft, Robert, Jr 935,
938, 967, 969, 1001, 1043, 1044, 1056, 1071, 1271-1274 (state-
ment), 1315, 1378, 1425.
Talcott, Burt L 937, 1111
Tarnovsky, N 1300
Teller, Edward 1297
Thomas, Norman 1353
Thompson, Dorothy 1353
Thorin, Duane 1297
Tillich (Ernst) 1506
Tito 955,1398
viii INDEX
Faga
Toland, John 1484
Toure, Sekou 1507
Tracy, Stanley J 1297
Trotsky (Lev, Leon) 1194
Trujillo (Rafael Leoidas) 1476
Truman, Harry S 1306
Tucker, Robert C 1210
Tychina, P 1300
U
Ulate (Otilio) 1472
Urey, Harold 1078
Uzhviy, N 1300
V
Vance, Cyrus R 1177
Vicas, George 1484
Vilde, I 1300
Villeda Morales (Jose) Ramon 1473
Virsky, P 1300
Vlasov (Audrey A.) 1353
Von Clausewitz, Karl. {See Clausewitz, Karl Von.)
W
Wagner, Addington 1383
Wallace, Henry 1057, 1368
Walsh, Lawrence E '•, 1175
Ward, Chester C 1297
Wedemeyer, Albert C 1297
West, Rebecca 1071
Weyl, Nathaniel 1003
AVhitman, Walt 1029
Wieland, William A 1477, 1478
Wilkie, Wendell 1352
Wilkins, Roy 1503
Williams, Harrison A., Jr 1265
Willis, Delbert 1343
Wilson, Bob 1313-1314 (statement)
Wilson, Donald M 1190
Wilson, Woodrow 1064
Woltman, Frederick 1062
Wright, Loyd 1297
Wriston (Henry M.) 990
Y
Yarborough, Ralph W 1265
Young, Robert 1484
Young, Stephen M 969, 1267, 1326
Young, Whitney 1503
Yura, I 1300
Z
Zawodny, J. K 1448
ORGANIZATIONS
AFL. ( See American Federation of Labor. )
AFL-CIO. (See American Federation of Labor-Congress of Industrial
Organizations.)
AID. (See U.S. Government, State Department, Agency for International
Development.)
INDEX ix
Page
Academy of Red Professors 1195
Academy of Social Sciences (Soviet Union). (See Russian Academy of
Social Sciences. )
Afro-Asian Solidarity Union 1410
Air University, Maxwell Air Force Base, Ala 1011, 1221
Air War (DoUege 1473
Alexis de Tocqueville Society. (See Council Against Communist Aggres-
sion. )
Alianza Para Progreso. {See Alliance for Progress. )
All American Conference to Combat Communism 1370
Alliance for Progress (Alianza Para Progreso) 1345,1346,1359,1471
American Bar Association 1236, 1453
American Federation of Labor (AFL) (see also American Federation of
Labor-Congress of Industrial Organizations) 1064,1074,1351
American Federation of Labor-Congress of Industrial Organizations
(AFL-CIO) (see also American Federation of Labor and Congress of
Industrial Organizations) 952
976, 1063, 1064, 1076, 1077, 1109, 1238, 1245, 1348, 1424
American Institute for Free Labor Development, AFL-CIO 995,
1046, 1059, 1067, 1070, 1108, 1109, 1245, 1309, 1348, 1424
Legislative Department 1056, 1064
American Free Labor Institute. (See AFL-CIO American Institute for
Free Labor Development.)
American Legion 1377-1383
First Annual National Convention, Minneapolis, Minn., November
10-12, 1919 1379
Forty-Fifth Annual National Convention, Miami Beach, Fla., Sep-
tember 10-12, 1963 1381, 1382
National Americanism Commission 1378
National Legislative Commission 1377
American Management Association 1453
American Olympics Committee 1061, 1074
American Security Council 1294-1297
American Society of Nevpspaper Editors 1239
Americans for Democratic Action (ADA) 1057,1058
Armistice Negotiating Commission, Korean war 1421
Army Special Warfare School, Fort Bragg 976, 1408
Army War College 1221, 1289, 1451
Asian People's Anti-Communist League 1060
Association for the United Nations (see also League of Nations Associa-
tion) 1058
Association of Young Rebels School, Cuba 1338
Aurora Latin American Training School for Communist Party Cadres
(Argentina) 1324
B
B'nai B'rlth 965, 1360, 1361
Bolshevik Party. (See Russian Social-Democratic Labor Party, Bolshe-
viks. )
Brown University (Providence, R.I.) 990
Business & Professional Women's Club (Orlando, Fla.) 952
Business Council for International Understanding 1510
C
CARE (Cooperative for American Remittances to Europe) 1511
CBS. ( See Columbia Broadcasting System. )
CIA. (See U.S. Government, Central Intelligence Agency.)
CIO. (See Congress of Industrial Organizations.)
California County Supervisors Association 1460
Cambridge Youth Council 1368
Cargnegie Foundation 989
Central University (Caracas, Venezuela) 974
Chamber of Commerce, U.S. Junior 950, 952, 1461
30-471— 64— pt. 2 19
X^^ INDEX
China, Government of ^^s*
Communist Government 968,
972, 976, 982, 997, 1057, 1066, 1199, 1281, 1418, 1442, 1480
Nationalist Government 1047
Cold War Council 1036, 1037, 1046, 1047, 1053, 1054
College de I'Europe Libre. {See Free Europe College.)
Colombo- American School 1345
Columbia Broadcasting System (CBS) 1507
Columbia University (New York City) 1038,1223,1224,1290
Institute of International Relations 1471
Comintern School, Soviet Union 1195
Committee Against Mass Expulsions 1352
Committee on Cold War Education of the Governor's Conference,
Florida 965, 1089, 1093
Committee on the Monument to T. G. Shevchenko 1298
Communist International. (See International, III.)
Communist Party, Argentina 1197
Communist Party, China 1195, 1196,
1199, 1200, 1301, 1317, 1323, 1362, 1445, 1458, 1467, 1469, 1480
Ministry of Social Affairs 1323, 1325
Communist Party, Cuba. {See Popular Socialist (Communist) Party,
Cuba.)
Communist Party, France 1027, 1197
Communist Party, India :
Chinese wing 1006, 1027
Soviet wing 1006, 1027
Communist Party of the United States of America 956, 1365
Communist Party, Soviet Union 1044, 1199,
1299, 1317, 1336, 1362, 1404, 1418, 1467, 1469, 1480
Central Committee 1083, 1301
Higher Party School 1195, 1199, 1216
Communist Youth League. {See Young Communist League, Soviet
Union.)
Congress for Cultural Freedom 1511
Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO) 1057
Cornell University (Ithaca, N.Y.) 953,989
Corning Glass Co 1502
Costa Rican Institute of Political Education. (See Institute of Political
Education, Costa Rica.)
Council Against Communist Aggression (Alexis de Tocqueville Society). 1056,
1058, 1070, 1071
Council Against Nazi Aggression 1351
Council of African Affiairs 1501
Countv Supervisors Association, California 1460
Cuba," Government of 997, 1083, 1456, 1480, 1486
Embassies :
Moscow, Russia 1084
D
Daughters of the American Revolution (DAR) 972
E
EIR. {See Schools of Revolutionary Education, Cuba. Escue de Instruc-
cion Revolutionaria. )
Economic Club of Detroit 1376
Escue de Instruccion Revolutionaria (EIR). {See Schools of Revolution-
ary Education, Cuba.)
F
FBI {See U.S. Government, Federal Bureau of Investigation.)
Far Eastern University. {See Sun-Yat Sen University.)
Federation of Cuban Women, Cuba 1338
Fight Communism, Western Europe 1104
Fletcher School of Diplomacy 1471
Florida Center for Cold War Education 1089
INDEX xi
Page
Florida State Department of Education 1094
Ford Foundation 1511
Fort Gulick, Canal Zone 976
Frank Pais School, Cuba 1334
Free Europe College (College de I'Europe Libre) (Strasbourg, France) _ 1469, 1470
Free Europe Committee, Inc 1419, 1481
Friendship University for the Friendship of the Peoples. {See Patrice
Lumumba University for the Friendship of the Peoples. )
G
Georgetown University (Washington, D.C.) 1020,1038,1223,1228,1286,1294
Governor Bryant's Conference on Cold War Education. (See Committee
on Cold War Education of the Governor's Conference, Florida.)
H
Harvard University (Cambridge, Mass.) 949,969,1107,1223,1290
Herter Committee. \{8ee U.S. Government, Committee on Foreign Affairs
Personnel, Herter Committee.)
Hoover Commission. {See U.S. Government, Commission on Organization
of the Executive Branch of the Government, Hoover Commission.)
Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace (Stanford Univer-
sity) 986, 1005, 1007, 1027, 1030, 1272
Howard University (Washington, D.C.) J078
Industrial College of the Armed Forces 1011. 1221, 1229
Industrial Workers of the World 1379
Information Council of the Americas (INCA), New Orleans, La 1045, 1510
Institute de Educacion Politica, Costa Rica. {See Institute of Political
Education, Costa Rica.)
Institute for Free Labor Development (AFL-CIO). {See AFL-CIO,
American Institute for Free Labor Development.)
Ilistitute for the Propagation of the Faith 1065
Institute for the Study of Latin American Relations 1196
Institute of American Strategy 1089
Institute of International Labor Research, Inc 1039
Institute of Marxism-Leninsm, Soviet Union 1216
Institute of Political Education, Costa Rica 953,
1037, 1039, 1040, 1046, 1048, 1309
Institute of World Economics, Soviet Union 1301
International, I (International Workingmen's Association) 1058
International III 1375
First World Congress, March 1-16, 1919, Moscow 1057
International Confederation of Free Trade Unions — 1057, 1103
International Congress of Orientalists, Twenty-fifth, Moscow, 1960 1208
International Olympics Committee, Chile 1061, 1073
International Publishers 1445
International Rescue Committee 1511
International Workingmen's Association. {See International, I.)
J
John Birch Society 944, 945, 1055, 1289
Johns Hopkins University (Baltimore, Md.) 989,1038
School of Advanced International Studies 1471
Junior Chamber of Commerce. {See Chamber of Commerce, U.S. Junior.)
K
Kaplan Foundation 1039
Karl Marx Academy (East Germany) 1195
Kiwanis (International) 1360, 1361,1370
Knights of Columbus 965
Knights of Labor 1057
xii INDEX
L
Fagt
Latin American Information Committee 1510
League of Nations Association (see also Association for the United
Nations) 1058
Lenin Insttiute of Political Warfare 964, 1194, 1203, 1306, 1423, 1470. 1481
Leningrad University 1207
Lincoln Civil War Society in Philadelphia 1102
Lions (International) 1360, 1361, 1370
M
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) (Cambridge, Mass.) 989
Mine Workers of America, United 1057
Ministerial Association 965
Moscow University 1207
N
NATO. (See North Atlantic Treaty Organization.)
Naples Civic Association 1089
National Association of County Officials, California 1458
National Cadre School, Cuha 1334
National Captive Nations Committee 1279
National Council of the Churches of Christ in the U.S. A 1511
National Fisheries School (Cuba) 1337
National Foreign Trade Council 1510
National Institute of Administration (Saigon, Vietnam) 1440,1441
National Labor Union School (Cuba) 1337
National People's Farmer School (Cuba) 1337
National Teachers School (Cuba) 1337
National War College 980,
981, 1014, 1018, 1221, 1228, 1286, 1289, 1435, 1436, 1451, 1453, 1473
Naval War College 1107, 1221
Near East Foundation 1511
New Council for Coordination of Scientific Work on Africa 1206
Nico Lopez National School (Cuba) 1336
North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) 1294,1295
Notre Dame University (South Bend Ind.) 1038,1278
Novosti Press Agency (APN) 1298-1300
OAS. (See Organization of American States.)
ORI. (See Organizaciones Revolucionarias Integradas — Integrated Rev-
olutionary Organizations, Cuba.)
Operation Amigo 1342, 1343, 1345-1349, 1360, 1361, 1363
Operation Crossroads Africa 1494, 1497, 1498, 1502, 1503, 1508
Organizaciones Revolutionarias Integradas — Integrated Revolutionary
Organizations (ORI), Cuba 1335,1336,1339,1341
Organizatton of American States (OAS) 1214,1251,1358
Orlando Committee 940, 941, 948, 949, 951, 952, 965, 967-969, 971, 972, 977,
989, 990, 993, 994, 996, 1044, 1070, 1097, 1108, 1224, 1237, 1325, 1326
P
Pan American Society 1510
Patrice Lumiunba University for the Friendship of the Peoples (formerly Friend-
ship University for the Friendship of the Peoples) (Moscow) _ 1251, 1470, 1481
Pennsylvania State Department of Public Instruction 1071
People-to-People Program 1511
Perkins Panel (or Committee). {See U.S. Government, President's Ad-
visory Panel on a National Academy of Foreign Affairs) (Perkins
Panel or Committee. )
Popular Socialist (Communist) Party, Cuba 1334,1335
Prague University 1207
INDEX xili
President's Advisory Panel on a National Academy of Foreign Affairs
(Perkins Panel). (See U.S. Government, President's Advisory Panel on
a National Academy of Foreign Affairs.) Page
Princeton University (Princeton, N.J.) 1242
Progressive Party 1368
R
Radio Free Europe 1276, 1419
Rand Corporation 1202, 1220, 1354
Red Men (Improved Order of) 1370
Refugee's Defense Committee 1353
Republic Aviation, Farmingdale, N.Y 1497
Reserve Officers Association of the United States 1420 (resolution)
Reuters Nevps Agency 1307
Rockefeller Foundation 1511
Rotary (International) 1360, 1361
Russian Academy of Sciences 1301, 1337
Russian Academy of Social Sciences 1206. 1216
Russian Social-Democratic Labor Party, Bolsheviks 1057
S
Saigon National Institute of Administration. (See National Institute of
Administration, Saigon, Vietnam. )
Schools of Revolutionary Education, Cuba (Escue de Instruccion Revolu-
tionaria, EIR. ) 1333-1341
First National Conference, December 1960 1341
Third National Conference, April 26, 1961 1337
Fourth National Conference, July 21-22, 1961 1337
Socialist-Labor Party 1057, 1064
Socialist Trade and Labor Alliance 1064
South Vietnam Reserve Officer's Training School 1440
Student Christian Program, Germany (Studentegemeinde) 1495
Studentegemeinde. (See Student Christian Program, Germany.)
Sun Yat-Sen University (also knovpn as Far Eastern University) 1194, 1195
T
Tass News Agency 1083, 1307, 1452
Taxpayers League of Blackstone Valley, Providence and Providence Plan-
tations 1514-1515 (statement)
Teachers Union of Japan 964
Tumbasiete School, Cuba 1334
U
UNESCO. (See United Nations, Educational Scientific, and Cultural
Organization. )
UNRRA. {See United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administrat-
tion.)
Ukrainian Congress Committee of America 1279
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, Government of 965,
968, 972, 976, 982, 1032, 1070, 1207, 1253, 1281, 1284, 1293, 1296,
1297, 1301, 1404, 1418, 1433, 1460, 1480.
Council of Ministers 1206, 1301
Embassies :
Washington, D.C 1283, 1298
Politburo 1226
Propaganda Ministry 1065, 1067
United Nations 1060, 1069
Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) 1299
Special Committee on the Problem of Hungary 1069^
United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration ( UNRRA )_ 1353
U.S. Government :
Atomic Energy Commission 986, 1078
Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) 974,
996, 1013, 1051, 1066, 1222, 1223, 1310
» Referred to as "Special Commission for Investigation of the Hungarian Events."
xiv INDEX
U.S. Government — Continued
Commission on Organization of The Executive Branch of The Govern- Page
ment (Hoover Commission) 1372
Committee on Foreign Affairs Personnel (Herter Committee) 1188,
1190. 1262, 1266
Defense, Department of 936. 943, 946, 951.
966, 967, 974, 980, 1051, 1177, 1182, 1189, 1301, 1310, 1486
General Services Administration :
National Archives 1007, 1017
House of Representatives :
Armed Services Committee 1 1314, 1513
Foreign Affairs Committee 1292, 1303, 1310
International Cooperation Administration (ICA) 1013
Justice, Department of 936, 937, 989, 1175
Federal Bureau of Inv^tigation (FBI) 1013,1222,1310,1316
Library of Congress 989, 1005-1007
Mutual Security Agency 1496
National Security Council (NSC) 952,967,980,1054
Office of Inter- American Affairs (OIAA) 1454
Operations Coordinating Board (OCB) (Old Psychological Warfare
Board) 951, 966, 967, 1319
Peace Corps 944, 974, 978
1032, 1042, 1242, 1313, 1345, 1347, 1359, 1499, 1503, 1504, 1507
President's Advisory Panel on a National Academy of Foreign Affairs,
The (Perkins Panel or Committee) 989,
990, 1182, 1188, 1190, 1262, 1266, 1270
Psychological Strategy Board 1276, 1308
Senate, United States :
Foreign Relations Committee 936, 990, 992, 994, 1032, 1056
Judiciary Committee 940
952, 963, 969, 987, 1056, 1058, 1070, 1241, 1313. 1314
Internal Security Subcommittee— 936. 937. 940, 967, 969, 1055. 1056
State Department 936, 943-945, 951, 953. 954, 971,
973, 974, 980, 988, 990, 991, 994-997, 1009, 1013, 1014, 1022,
1040, 1051-1055, 1061, 1068, 1072, 1078, 1093, 1100. 1106, 1176,
1178. 1184, 1244, 1251. 1254, 12.55, 1266, 1269, 1276, 1291, 1293,
1307, 1316, 1326. 1356, 1375, 1413, 1425, 1433, 1435. 1456, 1486
Agency for International Development (AID) 967.
969, 974, 980, 987, 989, 1109, 1301, 1309, 1311, 1359, 1441
Foreign Service Institute (FSI) 936, 965, 971,
973. 981, 988-991. 993, 1014, 1052. 1219, 1222, 1225, 1228,
1250, 1266. 1278. 1287. 1289. 1428. 1451, 1471. 1474
National Academy of Foreign Affairs (NAFA)__ 936, 943, 946, 953, 954.
960 969, 978, 988, 990-992, 1013, 1052, 1182-1188, 1190,
1249, 1252, 1264-1266, 1270, 1288, 1289, 1304, 1311. 1428,
1435.
Police Academy 1254
U.S. Information Agency (USIA)__ 936. 967. 969, 974, 980, 989, 1013, 1024.
10.36, 1046, 1047, 1051, 1100, 1188, 1190, 1212, 1217, 1222, 1242.
1273, 1510, 1513.
U.S. Information Service (USIS) 1047, 1048, 1496
Voice of America 974,1066,1283
University of Chicago (Chicago, 111.) 1102
University of Costa Rica (San Jose, Costa Rica) 1472
University of Delhi (Delhi, India) 1496
University of Denver (Denver, Colo.) 1501
University of Florida (Gainesville, Fla.) 950,986
University of London (London, England) 1105
University of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia, Pa.) 1038,1306
University of Pittsburgh (Pittsburgh, Pa.) 1062
University of Sendai (Japan) 1496
University of Southern California (USC) (Los Angeles, Calif.) 1038,1237
University of Tokyo (Tokyo, Japan) 1500
University of Vienna 1319
Upholsters' International Union of North America, AFL-CIO 1055,
1056, 1058, 1063, 1064
U.S. Inter-American Council 1510
INDEX XV
V
Page
Volunteer Christian Committee to Boycott Nazi Germany 1351
W
WEVD (radio station) 1352
WFTU. ( -See World Federation of Trade Unions. )
Warsaw Pact Nations 1294
World Federation of Teachers Unions 1085, 1086
World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU) 1057,1084
Y
Young Communist League, Soviet Union (Komsomol) 1080
YMCA. ( See Young Men's Christian Association. )
Young Men's Christian Association (YMCA) _ 1361
PUBLICATIONS
A
American Economic Republic, The (Berle) 1481
American Scholar, The 1448
An African Student in China (Hevi) 1079
An Inquiry Into Soviet Mentality (Niemeyer) 1274
Assigment in Utopia (Lyons) 966
Australian Army Journal 1429, 1442, 1449
B
Bedford Incident, The (book) 1310
Belmont Books 1210
Big Red School House (Time) 1197
British News Service 1307
Capital, Das (Kapital) (Marx) 1337
Century of Conflict, A (Possony) 1003, 1223, 1228
Child of the Revolution (Leonhard) 1195
Christian Science Monitor 1224
Collected Works (Lenin) 1021
Columbia Peon Tells His Moving Story, A (Marchant) 1445
Communism in Western Europe (Einaudi, Domenach and Garosci) 1197
Communist Economic Threat, The (State Department Publication 6777)— 1375
Communist Psychological Warfare (Strausz-Hupe) 1206
Copley Newspapers 1343, 1347
Cuba, Anatomy of a Revolution (Morray) 1312
Cuba Socialista (Socialist Cuba) 1323,1333,1336
D
Dr. Strangelove, or How to Fall in Love With the A-Bomb (book) 1310
E
Enemy Within, The (de Jaegher and Kuhn) 1197
P
Fail-Safe (book) 1310
Foreign Affairs 1016, 1478
Fort Worth Press 1343
Forward Strategy for America, A (Possony) 1228
Foundations of Marxist Philosophy 1337
Foundations of Socialism in Cuba (Los Fundamentos del Socialismo en
Cuba) (Roca) 1337
G
Green Book 967-969, 972, 973, 981, 1097, 1191-1241, 1357
Xti INDEX
H
Page
History Will Vindicate Me (La Historia Me Absolvera) (Castro) 1337
Human Element in Automation Systems, The ( Soviet Survey) 1209
Imperialism — Capitalism's Highest and Last Phase (Lenin) 1337
Internal Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences 1443
K
Kennan Memorandum 1076
Khrushchev's Mein Kampf (Belmont Books) 1210,1215,1216
L
LaPrensa Grafica 1346
Left Wing Communism, An Infantile Disorder (Lenin) 1192,1193
Life magazine 941, 1458
Los Fundamentos del Socialism© en Cuba. (See The Foundations of So-
cialism in Cuba, Bias Roca. )
Love of This Land (Robinson) 1496
M
Manual of Marxism-Leninism (Kuusinen) 1337
Manuel de Economia Politica (Political Economy Manual) 1337
Masters of Deceit (Hoover) 1197
Materialism and Empiriocriticism (Lenin) 1337
Meaning of Treason, The (West) 1071
Mein Kampf (Hitler) 1060, 1073
Miami Herald 1088, 1342, 1343, 1347, 1350
Modern Guerilla Warfare (Osanka) 1443
Moulding of Communists, The (Meyer) 1193,1197,1202,1203
N
New Frontier of War, The (Kintner, Kornfeder) 1207,1209,1215
New Republic 945
New York Herald Tribune 1317
New York World Telegram 1062
New York Times 1060, 1076, 1426, 1439, 1477, 1479, 1483, 1484
O
Occidente (newspaper) 1437
On Contradiction and About Practice (Mao Tse-tung) 1337
Organizational Weapon, The (Selznick) 962.1202
Orlando Sentinel 1242
P
Pall Mall Press 1079
Philadelphia Evening Bulletin 1453, 1454
Philadelphia Inquirer 1310
Phoenix Papers 1330
Pravda 1084,1297
Protracted Conflict (Strausz-Hupe) 1206
R
Reader's Digest 940, 948, 969, 995
Realties 1445
Red Design for the Americas (James) 1196
Reporter, The (magazine) 945,1478
Russia's Iron Age (Chamberlain) 966
INDEX
Fag*
Saturday Evening Post 941,963,964
Scholarship & Cold War in Moscow (Orbis) 1208
Scripps-Howard Newspapers 1343, 1347
Seven Days in May (book) 1310
Shevchenko, A Monument to the Liberation, Freedom, and Independence
of All Captive Nations (booklet) 1283
Sing Along AVith Khrushchev (Fabian) 1086
Sociology of Secret Societies (Roucek) 1447
Soviet Leaders and Mastery Over Man (Cantril) 1211
Stalin and the Uses of Psychology (Tucker) 1210
Street Without Joy (Fall) 1213
T
Think (magazine) 940,955, 1302
Time magazine 1479
Time OfE (newspaper), Kenya 1079
Times (of London) 1073
Tomorrow Is Today (Robinson) 1496
W
Wall Street Journal 1464
Washington Post 945, 1283, 1441
Washington Report (American Security Council) 1279, 1283, 1294-1297
What Is To Be Done (Lenin) 1191,1411
What's a Woman Doing Here (Chapelle) 1483
Whole of Their Lives, The (Gitlow) 1194
Why the United States Needs a Freedom Academy 940, 1302
Worker, The 1311
World Marxist Review 1369
World Politics 1210
o
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11