Foreign Relations of the United States, 1917–1972, Volume VIII, Public Diplomacy, 1969–1972

72. Memorandum From the Senior Military Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs (Haig) to the President’s Assistant for National Security Affairs (Kissinger)¹

Washington, February 17, 1970

SUBJECT

• Record of Conversation between Mr. Herschensohn of USIA and Kirk Douglas

Attached is a memorandum for the record of a conversation between Mr. Herschensohn of USIA and Kirk Douglas which is a followup resulting from our prod to Frank Shakespeare.²

Apparently you impressed Kirk Douglas very much and also whetted his appetite for a more active role in our information efforts. Mr. Herschensohn proposes the establishment of a committee consisting of Hollywood talent, Motion Picture Association of America and USIA, with a view to exploiting entertaining personalities already travelling abroad, with USIA acting as the catalyst. I believe the plan has some merits and that if Kirk Douglas were to participate in the formulation or membership of the committee, we may reap some real benefits, both internationally and politically, recognizing that the temperament of our players would require some careful and deft handling.

Recommendation:

That I call Henry Loomis in Frank Shakespeare’s absence and tell him that you are impressed with the initial outline of the plan and suggest that they proceed immediately to finalize the proposal to include perhaps additional coordination with Douglas, with the view toward seeing if he would be willing to play a role. The plan would then be run by us once more, through Klein, Ziegler and ultimately the President for final approval.³

Attachment

Memorandum From the Director of the United States Information Agency (Shakespeare) to the Senior Military Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs (Haig)⁴

Washington, February 16, 1970

The attached memorandum from Bruce Herschensohn, who is head of the Motion Picture and Television Service of USIA, summarizes his recent meeting with Kirk Douglas in Los Angeles. The memorandum is obviously confidential in nature and after I get back from Africa, I intend to give further consideration to the suggestions made and will be in touch with you at that time. In the meanwhile, if you or Henry have any suggestions, I would appreciate having them.

Frank Shakespeare⁵

Attachment

Memorandum From the Assistant Director, Motion Pictures and Television Service, United States Information Agency (Herschensohn) to the Director (Shakespeare)⁶

Washington, February 10, 1970

REFERENCE

• My Memo of February 9, 1970⁷

As you suggested, I had a meeting with Kirk Douglas. He feels the government is not taking advantage of some of the nation’s best talent which could be used as world-wide ambassadors of good will.

In the past he has done such work with USIA coordination. He said though he has thank you letters from Presidents Kennedy and Johnson, there was never any follow-up. No one asked him to do more. He doesn’t want to be a nuisance but he wants to do something for the country and feels he can do this kind of work well.⁸ He also believes many others would be more than willing if only asked.

He feels there ought to be an organized effort, particularly to take advantage of those celebrities who are overseas making films, therefore, transportation being of no cost to the government. Further, he feels payment of any kind would be unnecessary. He feels we are missing the boat.

With all the pitfalls and dangers, I agree with him. We are not taking advantage of a national asset. The obvious danger is, what happens when these celebrities speak against present policy? Practically all the actors and actresses he mentioned and can summon are people who not only represent the liberal persuasion and are politically partisan but they are highly outspoken. (Paul Newman, Burt Lancaster, Marlon Brando were some of the names.)

In the course of our conversation he said if anyone in an audience asked him he would say, “I didn’t vote for Nixon, but frankly I think he’s doing a damned good job”. He, obviously, is one who gets involved at election time as a partisan but is non-partisan after the election and I feel he could be a real asset. I’m not so sure of some of the other names mentioned (not so much in regard to the President, but in regard to present policies).

At any rate, I feel a sensible plan could and should be worked out and may have many benefits.

First, he’s right. So many of these people want to do something for their country, and almost feel a frustration at not being asked. Most are too proud to ask if they can be useful. Secondly, they do draw crowds and we could be in the act just enough to enlarge or limit future engagements, depending on how they conduct their engagements and how they respond to questions. We could also be out of the act enough to make it a non-government representation. If they were good (and certainly some would be good), it could be some of the best people-to-people contact.

There is another benefit: It is often said (because it’s true), that the Hollywood artistic community is largely liberally oriented and from the Democratic party. Kirk Douglas met Henry Kissinger and now he raves about him. In short, he found out Republicans are also humans and perhaps Washington should discover Hollywood personalities are also humans. To my knowledge, no President since FDR has recognized Hollywood’s contributions to the point of requesting their contributions. That’s the highest honor. Perhaps President Nixon could set up a committee for the purpose of doing exactly that. He would be recognizing the unique position of the American film industry—an industry of artists who have created a major twentieth century art form. He would also show he realizes they can tell the world about the creative spirit in America perhaps better than a government official. The Hollywood community would be flattered beyond comparison with any other Presidential directive.

The following is a preliminary plan only for the purpose of discussion:

The President appoints a committee to take national advantage of the resource of already travelling Hollywood artists. The committee consists of Hollywood talent, MPAA, and USIA (or State/CU). The committee meets quarterly and acts as a clearing house to assimilate what personalities will be where in the next three months, and who would be interested in talking to specific groups. The USIA representative would then advise the appropriate PAO’s in those countries where the celebrities will be visiting.

The PAO arranges for whatever we request. (Perhaps a meeting with university students on a particular topic or a creative group on another topic or whatever.) USIA Washington would serve as the catalyst, the PAO’s as planners. If we find out that celebrity #7 is counter-productive to the foreign policy aims of the country, we take his name off the list for future engagements.

Would we act as censor? Not really. Certainly not regarding what they say. We would set-up where they speak and to whom they speak. We would also advise the committee of our recommendations based on past performances.

Though the cinema is now a world-wide art, America is its inventor and retains a monopoly of real talent.

I think this plan, or something like it, is something the government should initiate during this Administration.

We all know there is a real two party system emerging in the South. Beyond this plan’s more obvious immediate merits, maybe we can help create a two party system in Hollywood.

Bruce Herschensohn⁹

1. Source: National Archives, Nixon Presidential Materials, NSC Files, Box 293, Agency Files, USIA—Vol. I [Apr 69–25 Feb 70]. Limited Official Use. Kissinger initialed the top right-hand corner of the memorandum. Haig wrote “File” next to Kissinger’s initials and drew an arrow from it to his name and initials in the “from” line.
2. See footnote 1, Document 65.
3. Haig added the “Approve” and “Disapprove” lines at the bottom of the memorandum by hand. Kissinger placed a checkmark on the “Approve” line.
4. Limited Official Use.
5. Shakespeare signed “Frank” above this typed signature.
6. Limited Official Use. A copy was sent to Loomis. Another copy is in the National Archives, RG 306, Office of Policy and Plans, IOP/C Cultural Subject Files, 1955–1971, Entry UD–90, Box 3, EDX 22 Visit of Kirk Douglas.
7. Not found.
8. In a March 6 memorandum to Weathersby, Bunce indicated that IAN and IAL were interested in programming Douglas, with IAL providing a number of programming options. Bunce continued: “Based on past experience, it is clear that Douglas wants to be treated as something more than a film star and is not much interested in drama groups per se. He likes to project ‘a picture of himself as a poor boy who had made good and had kept a sense of proportion and faith in American society and institutions.’ It is also clear, however, that it is as a Hollywood film star that he has interest for overseas audiences and any programming would have to start from that premise. He has been effective in meeting with university students. He appears able to talk on such subjects as ‘The role of the arts in a democracy,’ ‘The performing artist in a modern society,’ ‘Is the cinema dead?’ He also is not adverse, apparently, to discussing civil rights, war and peace and other subjects in a political vein.” (National Archives, RG 306, Office of Policy and Plans, IOP/C Cultural Subject Files 1955–1971, Entry UD–90, Box 3, EDX 22 Visit of Kirk Douglas)
9. Herschensohn signed “Bruce” above this typed signature.