Dr. Frank Stanton, of March 1975; two, the report of the Commission on the Organization of the Government for the Conduct of Foreign Policy, better known as the Murphy Commission, made in July 1975; three, the May 1977 report of the General Accounting Office; four, the May 1977 report of the U.S. Advisory Commission on Information; and finally, the extensive hearings held this past June by the Fascell subcommittee of the House International Relations Committee. I note that the President was required to consider the first four of these by section 501 of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act. I should point out in response to Mr. Horton that because we had all this excellent work to draw upon, the need to conduct a lengthy study of our own with another major report was obviated for the most part. Obviously there are a great many differences among the previous reports. We have tried to learn from them and to choose the best from them. We are grateful for the work of this committee and the International Relations Committee in helping to ventilate these issues. I will not take the time here to set forth the findings and recommendations of these various studies, since they are described in the appendix to my statement. There were, of course, many differences, as I have said, but each called for consolidation of the educational and cultural programs of State with some or all of USIA's programs. I do want to say that the President's basic line of thought on this matter was that the separation in Washington of programs that are consolidated in the field is anomalous and should not be permitted to continue; the nonpolitical nature of the cultural programs and the independence of the Voice of America's news operations are desirable, but can be assured as a functional matter without making them structurally independent and fragmented; and the new Agency containing these programs should have sufficient distance from State to assure its basic independence, but should at the same time have some relationship with State reflecting its position as part of our foreign policy mechanism. I have already referred to the Board of Foreign Scholarships and the fact that it will be retained without change in the new Agency. In addition, the two advisory commissions that now advise USIA and the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs will be combined into a single advisory commission, known as the Advisory Commission on International Communication, Cultural, and Educational Affairs. The new Commission will have seven members, appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. They will be drawn from various fields related to the mission of the Agency and will be selected on a nonpartisan basis. The new Commission will report annually, and at such other times as it chooses, to the President, the Congress, the Secretary of State, and the Director of the Agency on its appraisals of and recommendations for the programs vested in the Agency. The Commission is also authorized to report to the public, here and abroad, to develop a better understanding and support for the programs of the Agency. The East-West Center is a national educational institution, established by Federal statute and incorporated in the State of Hawaii, where it provides scholars from countries of the East and West with a place to study, receive training, and exchange views. No change will be made in the Center by the reorganization, though its backstopping and funding, which has come from the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, will now come from the new Agency for International Communication. We believe that Reorganization Plan No. 2 is a sound proposal. The plan will both increase the efficiency of our public diplomacy programs and provide a framework for the emerging spirit of mutuality. It provides full protection for the nonpolitical character of the educational and cultural exchange programs, and for the independence of the news operations of the Voice of America. We earnestly solicit the support of this committee for this plan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We will be glad to try to answer questions. Mr. Szanton and Mr. Hirschhorn will participate in answering them. Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Fascell? Mr. FASCELL. May I put something in the record at this point since the work of the subcommittee which I chair was referred to. This is a letter to the President and the recommendations that were made to the President by the International Operations Subcommittee. I do not believe they are part of the appendix. There is also a list of the witnesses who appeared before that subcommittee. Mr. BROOKS. Without objection, so ordered. Thank you very much for bringing that to our attention. [The material follows:] CLEMENT J. ZADLOCKI, WIS., CHAIRMAN H. FOUNTAIN, N.C. DANTE B. FASCELL, FLA. MICHAEL HARRINGTON, MASS. MELEN S. MEYNER, N.J. DON BONKER, WASH. GERRY 2. STUDDS, MASS. ANDY IRELAND, PLA, DONALD J. PEASE, OHIO ANTHONY C. BEILENSON, CALIF. WYCHE FOWLER, JR., GA. E (KIKA) DE LA GARZA, TEX. WILLIAM S. BROOMFIELD, MICH. JOHN H. BUCHANAN, JR., ALA. JOHN J. BRADY, JR. CHIEF OF STAFF Congress of the United States House of Representatives August 3, 1977 President Jimmy Carter Washington, D. C. 20500 Dear Mr. President: The Subcommittee on International Operations has recently completed 10 days of hearings on issues relating to the reorganization of the USIA, the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs and other programs encompassed by the term public diplomacy. These hearings were held as part. of the Subcommittee's effort to work jointly with the Executive Branch on: public diplomacy reorganization pursuant to an understanding between Chairman Fascell and Secretary Vance. We want to share with you some general observations which we hope will be useful to you in deciding among various options for reorganization. Our findings are included in the attached memorandum. We look forward to continuing to work with you to ensure the most efficient and effective use of our public diplomacy resources. Committee on International Relations MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT August 3, 1977 From June 8 to June 24, 1977 the Subcommittee on International Operations of the House International Relations Committee heard testimony from 45 witnesses on issues related to reorganization of public diplomacy programs. A list of witnesses is attached. In addition, the Subcommittee received more than a score of additional unsolicited statements for inclusion in the hearing record. Based on the hearing record, the Subcommittee has reached the following general conclusions. 1. The key to effective use of our public diplomacy resources is an awareness of the utility of these resources and a willingness to use them to further policy objectives. Reorganization is important, but only of marginal concern in dealing with this basic problem. 2. The head of the USIA (or successor agency) should be included in NSC and Cabinet meetings. Participation by the USIA Director will (a) substantially increase opportunities for maximum effective use of public diplomacy resources, and (b) allow the Agency to perform its responsibilities for explaining policy for the entire government. 3. USIA should not be merged into the Department of State. USIA must work closely with the Department of State. It is important that USIA or a successor bureau or agency have sufficient budgetary, personnel and administrative autonomy to ensure a corps of officers qualified and inspired to carry out the full range of public diplomacy in our national interests. The Director of USIA or his successor should be included in all major policy decisions within the Department of State. Similarly, lower level officials concerned with public diplomacy should be involved in all major policy formulation sessions at all appropriate · lower and intermediate levels.. 4. The programs administered by the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs should be merged into the USIA. 5. The VOA should remain in the USIA. 6. The present authority and organization of the Board for Foreign Scholarships should be maintained. Memorandum for the President 7. The integrity of both our educational and cultural programs and of the programming of the Voice of America is of paramount concern. Inevitably conflicts will arise over both programs in an attempt to resolve both (a) competitive short-term and long-term objectives, and (b) the distinctions between government policy and divergent opinions in the country as a whole. No structural reorganization including the establishment of separate agencies for exchange activities or broadcasting will provide immunity from political pressures. Changes can be made, however, which will minimize the abuse of exchange programs or broadcasting activities. 8. The United States Advisory Commission on Information and the United States Advisory Commission on International Educational and Cultural Affairs can be restructured to more effectively safeguard the integrity of both exchange programs and of Voice of America programming. The following measures can ensure and safeguard the integrity and credibility vital to the success of our long-term public diplomacy programs: (a) higher caliber membership, (b) mandatory periodic reports, (c) independent staff to investigate alleged improper actions, (d) requirements for officials to notify the advisory group of pressures which would contravene the mandate of the programs, and (e) obligation of the Director to respond to the Administration and the Congress on advisory commission reports and staff investigation findings. 9. The USIA needs a fundamental internal reorganization. There are far too many officials at the assistant director level. It is important, however, that if either or both the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs or the Voice of America are within a reorganized USIA that the Directors of these programs be at the highest level beneath the Agency Director and that their independent access to Congress be assured. This would further ensure the integrity and credibility of these two programs. 10. Regardless of the future relationship of USIA and CU to the Department of State, clear responsibility should be assigned to a high official of the Department of State for (a) all issues relating to the freedom of communication, (b) technical matters which may impinge on freedom of communication, and (c) coordination of public diplomacy activities of Defense, Treasury, Commerce, HEW and other agencies. 11. The mandate governing USIA operations which was issued by President Kennedy should be reviewed and updated. |