Page images
PDF
EPUB

Y 4.G 74/7:R 29/3/977/NO.2

Reorganization plan no

Stanford University Libraries

C.1

3 6105 045 361 164

DATE DUE

STANFORD UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

STANFORD, CALIFORNIA 94305-6004

In making your decision, I would hope that your committee will be as sensitive to the concerns of scholars and other private individuals around this country as it is to the interests of our government agencies.

[blocks in formation]

Congressman Dante Fascell, Chairman, International

Operations Subcommittee of the House International
Relations Committee

Senator Edward Zorinsky

Senator Carl Curtis

Donald S. Lowitz, Chairman, Board of Foreign Scholarships
Ralph Vogel, Director, Operations Staff, Board of

Foreign Scholarships

Charles Blitzer, Chairman, Council for International
Exchange of Scholars

Adolph Wilburn, Director, Council for International
Exchange of Scholars

Barry Jagoda, Special Assistant to the President

Shirley Clarkson, Assistant Director, International
Linkages in Higher Education

Maurice Harari, Director, International Programs AASCU

STATEMENT SUBMITTED

TO THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
ON THE PROPOSED AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL COMMUNICATION
REORGANIZATION PLAN NUMBER TWO

by

Charles Blitzer, Chairman

Council for International Exchange of Scholars

November 4, 1977

I am happy to have this opportunity, on behalf of the Council for International Exchange of Scholars, to comment on Reorganization Plan Number 2, "to consolidate certain international communication, educational and cultural and broadcasting activities of the United States government.'

The Council for International Exchange of Scholars, a private, non-profit organization, concerned solely with the exchange of scholars, was established in 1947 by the Conference Board of Associated Research Councils, a group composed of the American Council of Learned Societies, the National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council, the Social Science Research Council and the American Council on Education. Its governing body is composed of scholars nominated by these four councils. For the past thirty years the CIES has had major responsibility for the administration of the Senior Fulbright-Hays Program in the United States. It has conducted annual competitions and nominated American scholars for university lecturing and postdoctoral research awards abroad, arranged for the affiliation and academic programs of visiting scholars in the United States, developed orientation programs, organized seminars and conferences, and advised the Department of State and Board of Foreign Scholarships on both operational and policy issues relating to the senior program.

The Council and its staff have now had an opportunity to study Reorganization Plan No. 2 and the President's transmittal letter to the Congress. We have also had the privilege of discussing the Plan at some length with Ambassador Reinhardt. We feel that the Plan, as we now understand it, offers some very real advantages of organization in the conduct of public diplomacy by the United States, and also contains some dangers. The advantages consist largely of simplification and unification in Washington, D.C. of activities that are already unified in the field; the dangers are perhaps more apparent than real and relate to perceptions of purpose and significance of combining informational and educational programs. We would like to comment specifically on both of these, within the context of the record of the Fulbright-Hays Program during the last thirty years.

We feel that the record to date has been good. Under the senior Fulbright Program some 15,000 American university professors and advanced research scholars have gone abroad and a similar number of scholars from other countries have come to the United States. With virtually no exceptions, American scholars have been received hospitably, even when the activities of our Government were viewed with skepticism or disapproval. While it was well understood that they came on United States Government grants, they were perceived in their academic and professional roles, not as spokesmen for official government policy.

There are, we believe, three principal reasons for the high repute of the Fulbright Program. One is that participants are known to have been selected by their peers according to the criteria of professional and academic merit. Because of the prestige of the program, members of the American academic community have been glad to teach or engage in research abroad under its auspices, often at some financial hardship, and also to serve without compensation on the Council's review committees. The second reason is that most grants have been planned and administered by binational foundations and commissions in the host country. Composed of equal numbers of Americans resident in the country and of national scholars and officials, the binational agencies have helped give the program credibility and acceptance.

Finally, general supervision of the program has been vested in the Presidentiallyappointed Board of Foreign Scholarships, which has the responsibility for selecting all grantees. The Board's selections are based on the recommendations of the Council, subject to approval and placement abroad.

The CIES is concerned that, whatever changes may be made in administrative arrangements, the Fulbright Program continue to be insulated from immediate foreign policy goals. The program has the long-range purpose of "increasing mutual understanding between the people of the United States and the people of other countries" and "of promoting international cooperation for educational and cultural advancement." Through its devotion to the free

« PreviousContinue »