100.4 PSB/10–3052: Airgram
Secretary of State to the Office of
the United States High Commissioner for Germany, at
A–572. Ref: PSB Plan for Germany. The Psychological Strategy Board (PSB) has now given final approval to the paper entitled, “A National Psychological Strategy with Respect to Germany” (PSB D–21).1 This document was contionally adopted by the PSB at its August 7 meeting with the provision that certain minor changes were to be worked out by the Departmental and Agency staffs jointly and submitted to the Alternate Members of the Board for vote-slip approval. This action was completed and the paper is now approved. Three copies are being forwarded herewith for your use.
It is noted that it was the earlier draft (actually dated August 12, 1952) which was received and commented upon by HICOG at the request of Mr. Norberg of the PSB.2 An examination of the approved paper will reflect that the more important points raised by HICOG have been taken into consideration in the preparation of the final draft. Moreover, it has been agreed that other HICOG recommendations not specifically included in this draft will be considered further in connection with the implementation of the Plan.
In the opinion of the Department, the next task facing us is that of determining the order of priorities with respect to the Tasks (Section IV) and Desired Actions (Section V). Without prejudice to the long range tasks, it is the Department’s view that this order of priority must reflect and give emphasis to the urgent policy problems demanding the early attention of the U.S. Government. The following would appear to be the tasks of our psychological strategy in Germany and related to Germany which require maximum concentrated effort for the immediate period ahead. The references in the Plan which appear applicable are indicated in each instance.
- Ratification of the contractual and EDC agreements and the development of the broadest possible public support for and participation in these agreements. (Tasks la, b, d, e). In this connection, one of our concerns will be the settlement of the Saar controversy. Tasks 4b, 6a and b would appear to apply here.
- Maintenance of the Allied position in Berlin (Tasks 2a, b and c).
. . . . . . .
It would be inexpedient because of constantly changing conditions to prepare a definitive list of priorities which might deprive us of the needed freedom of action. It is also not our intention to suggest that these are the only tasks which should be considered for treatment during the coming year. It is conceivable, for example, that it may prove necessary for us to increase our psychological support of policies relating to the issue of German unity. Any schedule of priorities must therefore be held as flexible as possible subject to constant review in the light of upcoming contingencies. With reference to the three major tasks listed above, actions contained in Section V which appear to be applicable and not already in the process of implementation should be initiated without delay.
It is realized that a great many of the actions included under Section V are already being carried out by HICOG and other U.S. agencies and Departments and that others are in the planning stage. The Department is, of course, interested in obtaining a more detailed picture than is now available of the various activities and programs being carried on in Germany so that a satisfactory division of labor can be agreed upon between the appropriate agencies in the field and in the U.S. For similar reasons, the Department is most anxious to be advised of arrangements made in the field to ensure operational coordination among various agencies to which co-responsibility for action or support has been assigned.
It would be greatly appreciated if you would make your comments on the foregoing available in the near future.
Henry Kellermann, Director of German Public Affairs, who will leave for Germany within the next week, will be available for discussion and consultation with the appropriate officers in HICOG.
- Document 156.↩
- The specific comments by HICOG under reference here have not been identified further; however, a set of comments by HICOG on the Aug. 12 draft of PSB D–21 is in file 511.62A/9–252 through 9–552 and an excerpt from the comments prepared by HICOG was transmitted as an attachment to a memorandum to Alan G. Kirk, Director of the PSB, on Sept. 30. (PSB files, lot 62 D 333, PSB D–21 Series)↩