Foreign Relations of the United States, 1958–1960, Volume III, Microfiche Supplement, National Security Policy; Arms Control and Disarmament

210. Memorandum of Discussion at the 422d NSC Meeting¹

Washington, October 29, 1959

SUBJECT

• 422nd NSC Meeting, Thursday, October 29, 1959

Present at the 422nd NSC Meeting were the President of the United States, presiding; the Secretary of State; the Acting Secretary of Defense (Gates); and the Director, Office of Civil and Defense Mobilization. Also attending the meeting and participating in the Council actions below were the Acting Secretary of the Treasury (Scribner); the Director, Bureau of the Budget; and the Chairman, Atomic Energy Commission (Item 3). Also attending the meeting were the Director of Central Intelligence; the Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff; the Director, U.S. Information Agency; the U.S. Representative to NATO (W. Randolph Burgess); the Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs (Murphy); the Deputy Director, U.S. Information Agency; the Special Assistants to the President for National Security Affairs, for Science and Technology, and for Security Operations Coordination; Assistant Secretary of State Gerard C. Smith; Assistant Secretary of Defense John N. Irwin II; the White House Staff Secretary; the Assistant White House Staff Secretary; Mr. Frederic Bundy, U.S. Information Agency; the Executive Secretary, NSC; Mr. Robert H. Johnson, NSC; and Mr. Charles Haskins, NSC.

There follows a summary of the discussion at the meeting and the main points taken.

1. SIGNIFICANT WORLD DEVELOPMENTS AFFECTING U.S. SECURITY

The Director of Central Intelligence began his briefing by stating that during the past week—on the 22nd and 25th—two ballistic missiles had been launched from Tyura Tam which had gone 4700 nautical miles landing in a new impact area in the Pacific 700 miles from Midway. He reminded the Council that sometime back there had been two other “long” shots into this same area. He was inclined to credit Khrushchev’s statement that these earlier shots had been overshots. The two recent shots, however, had landed in the new impact area as planned. Using a map he indicated the course of these missiles and the location of the impact area. He reminded the Council that in an earlier briefing he had described this impact area and the heavily instrumented vessels which the Soviets had positioned in this area for detection purposes.

In the case of each of these last two shots the vehicle had been sighted during the terminal part of its flight by American observers from a nearby island. The first of them had also been seen from American aircraft; monitoring of the count-down had given us sufficient time to get planes in the air. There were no reports as yet as to whether the second shot had been observed from U.S. aircraft. Preparation for these two launchings had been long and elaborate. They may have had something to do with the Russian space program—for example, with the development of a recoverable nose cone. The missiles had had a lower trajectory than they were capable of. If the trajectory had been raised, they could have gone farther; the Russians in future shots may therefore have problems in avoiding coming too close to Midway.

The Director indicated that the scientific office of CIA had been analyzing the Soviet moon photograph. The photograph was probably genuine, and, if so, represented a technical feat of singular importance. The Russians had had to overcome great technical problems in controlling from such a great distance the equipment which took the picture and transmitted it back to the earth. The photographs were being studied further. If the Russians should make the film available, more careful analysis would be possible.

[Omitted here are agenda items 2 and 3.]

4. U.S. OVERSEAS MILITARY BASES

(NSC Actions Nos. 1876, 2034 and 2070; Memos for NSC from Executive Secretary, same subject, dated January 14 and March 17, 1958)

At the end of the discussion of Moroccan bases, the President referred to the study by the late Frank Nash of U.S. overseas bases. He said that he believed that the base system should be looked at by an official who would go and study it every six months. He felt that we had our heads in the sand on the bases—the foreign countries concerned were excited about national aspirations and sovereignty and we were in the position of being blackmailed. He noted that only this morning, in connection with the paper on Libya, it had been indicated that we were likely to have trouble at Wheelus. He thought that the base agreements which had been made ten years ago were beginning to be outmoded. We could not continue to depend on these facilities on the same basis as in the past. He was tired, he said, of repetitions of formal studies, but he wanted someone to go off and look at the base situation and then to come back and report. Responding to the President’s point, Secretary Gates said that he would have someone look again at the Nash Report. Secretary Herter suggested that anyone who went overseas to survey U.S. bases should include the Prime Minister of Morocco in his consultations.

The National Security Council:

Noted the President’s request that the Secretary of Defense designate an official to re-examine the U.S. overseas military base system and review the findings and recommendations thereon contained in the Report to the President by the late Mr. Frank C. Nash (enclosure to the reference memorandum of January 14, 1958), reporting the results of such re-examination and review to the President within six months.

NOTE: The above action, as approved by the President, subsequently transmitted to the Secretary of Defense for appropriate implementation.

5. STATUS OF NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS AS OF JUNE 30, 1959: THE USIA PROGRAM (NSC 5912)

Mr. Allen began his briefing by pointing out that the activity in which USIA was engaged was really an additional aspect of the conduct of our foreign relations. It had very recently been added as an activity of governments. Traditionally, communications between countries had been on a government-to-government basis. If a diplomat appealed to the people of a country over the heads of the leaders, he would, in the past, have been rapped over the knuckles. Now, however, practically all governments were speaking directly to the peoples of other countries. This sort of activity was growing very rapidly. Mr. Allen stated that some of those who were involved in this aspect of the conduct of our foreign relations had to remind themselves of the relatively small part that it still played in the conduct of those relations. Diplomacy was still the most important means by which nations spoke to each other. However, even those activities that were primarily important as communication between governments, such as the President’s trip to Europe, had an important aspect of communication with peoples as well. For example, one important aspect of the President’s trip to Europe was his appearance on television with Prime Minister Macmillan. This appearance had been credited with having an important effect upon the outcome of the British elections.

Mr. Allen then displayed a chart organized on the basis of media and showing the share of the Communist World, the Free World, and the U.S. in the output of the various means of international communication. He noted that 600 million books each year crossed international boundaries either through direct export or through publication by one country in another. Of this world total 25 per cent was Communist, 75 per cent Free World. The U.S. accounted for 17 per cent of the world total and USIA inspired publication of 3 per cent of that total. USIA last year published 17 million books of which 9.5 million were in foreign languages and 7.5 million in English. Mr. Allen displayed examples of the books published under USIA auspices in foreign languages. He said that these books fell into two main categories: those dealing with Americanism and those which were anti-Communist. In most cases USIA inspires publication either by agreeing in advance to buy a certain number of copies or by paying for translation and helping the publisher obtain copyright privileges. He also displayed student editions which were sold for as little as ten or fifteen cents. He said that the U.S. had often been rawhided on the grounds that the Communists were flooding world markets with literature while the U.S. was doing nothing. However, in some cases the U.S. had flooded the market to such an extent and put the price so low that the value of a book as paper was greater than its value as literature. Thus a book published in India in the Gujerati language had been distributed in quantities that were greater than the traffic would bear and as a result copies had turned up in the paper pulp shops in Bombay.

Turning to the press, Mr. Allen pointed out that one million words a day crossed international boundaries of which 30 per cent were Communist and 70 per cent Free World. One-half of the total was accounted for by the U.S. and five per cent, or 50,000 words per day, was accounted for by USIA. He noted that there were 10,000 hours of international broadcasting every week of which 25 percent were Communist and 75 per cent Free World. USIA accounted for 6 per cent. Referring next to motion pictures, he stated that 2700 feature films are produced each year of which 12 per cent are Communist and 88 per cent Free World. The U.S. accounted for 10 per cent. USIA produced no feature films, only documentaries.

Mr. Allen then went on to state that exhibitions were often the most effective way of reaching people. As an example, he pointed out that, when he first went to Belgrade as Ambassador, Tito had just broken with the Kremlin and had been afraid to show any sympathy with the U.S. The Yugoslavs would not go to the USIA Library. However, USIA had had a display window on the main street which was changed each week. When the people of Belgrade promenaded on this street every evening, the area around the USIA window was mobbed. Mr. Allen also noted that the Moscow Exhibition had been the most spectacular single incident involving USIA programs during the last year; it had been attended by three million Russians. He noted the role of the performing arts in USIA programs and called attention to programs for sending American athletes and lecturers abroad.

He pointed out that the people-to-people program provided a means through which the American people could make contacts with people with similar interests in other countries. He noted that the business community was now getting into this program in a big way. He suggested that official visits were one of the most important ways of communicating with peoples and in this connection mentioned the impact of the Vice President’s visit to the USSR on the Russian people. He again emphasized the impact of the President’s trip to Europe on European peoples and went on to point out that in the history of the U.S. no President had visited the area of Asia and the Middle East where one-half the population of the world lives. He noted the speculation in the press that the President might make a trip to this part of the world. He stated that, if the President should make such a trip, it would greatly overshadow USIA efforts in its impact upon the peoples of this area in addition, of course, to its importance in providing opportunities for communication between the President and the leaders of countries in the area.

Mr. Allen suggested that the American people and other peoples of the world were alert to propaganda. In the light of this alertness USIA could take two approaches to its job. It might conceal itself as much as possible, making use of local publications, the furnishing of background information to local newspapers and similar activities. Often this was the most effective way of doing the job. On the other hand, Mr. Allen felt that the main effort should be to make the label “USIA” something not to be ashamed of—something to be respected. He believed that our efforts should be directed toward creating a situation where people would say “This is the American Government speaking and therefore what is said is correct, is true.” We should concentrate more and more on creating an atmosphere where we would not be ashamed, but would actually be proud, of USIA. This atmosphere, he indicated, already exists in some places. For example, he pointed out that a newspaper publisher in Bombay had indicated to him that he considered material more, rather than less, reliable when it bore the USIS label. If we took this course, Mr. Allen suggested, it would tend to get USIA increasingly out of gray or covert operations. USIA would then not have to be continually withdrawing from positions or having to explain embarrassing situations. Other agencies of the government, he felt, could handle covert activities.

Mr. Allen said that the business community was becoming more interested in building a better impression overseas and that Mr. Clarence Randall as well as Mr. White of Republic Steel had been very helpful in this respect. However, there was still considerable resistance in the business community based upon the view that business should not become involved in working hand-in-glove with the government overseas. For example, Mr. Humphrey of U.S. Rubber argued that American business overseas was highly regarded and that if the government got us into trouble overseas, it was up to the government to get us out of trouble. Mr. Humphrey did not want business tarnished with anything looking like government propaganda. However, some business leaders were working to get the business community to recognize that their overseas operations sink or swim with the U.S. posture overseas. The business Council for International Understanding, which was to meet on Friday, had been helpful in developing people-to-people projects.

Mr. Allen then referred to Voice of America construction activities. He stated that the principal construction underway was the big facility being built on the East Coast of the U.S. When this facility was completed, we would be able to send a strong signal abroad even if our installations abroad were knocked out. Next in importance to this East Coast facility was the important relay base we were building on the West Coast of Africa in Liberia. Liberia actually welcomed this facility. Mr. Allen noted that in some areas of the world listening to short-wave broadcasts was on the decline as local stations were developed, but in an area like Africa, where people were just acquiring enough money to be able to afford to buy radios, short-wave broadcasting was of increasing importance. In this connection he pointed out that Phillips had sold three thousand radio sets during the month of July in the Belgian Congo and that 90 per cent of these had been bought by Africans.

Finally, Mr. Allen stated that those who were engaged in the USIA type of activity realize that sometimes the best policy is to keep quiet. For example, the State Department had a year ago set up a group to do something about Antarctica. This group had decided that a conference should be called of the eleven nations that had worked in Antarctica during the Geophysical Year in order to develop a formula for continued international cooperation. When the State Department note had been sent to the eleven nations, there had been talk within USIA of putting it on VOA and exploiting it heavily. Mr. Allen, however, had taken a contrary position. He had felt that if we had started bragging, our action would have been viewed as a propaganda stunt rather than as a real effort to get agreement and therefore that we would have prejudiced the changes of getting an agreement. He noted that there was now a real possibility of getting a solid agreement on Antarctica.

The President concluded the meeting by telling the Council a story. He said that a wealthy friend of his, who had recently died, had told him when he was 75 years old that he could not remember any time during the 75 years when he had learned anything while talking.

The National Security Council:

Noted an oral presentation on the status of the U.S. Information Agency Program, by the Director, U.S. Information Agency, based upon Part 5 of NSC 5912 and recent developments.

Robert H. Johnson

1. Source: Agenda item 1: Significant World Developments Affecting U.S. Security; Agenda item 4: U.S. Overseas Military Bases; Agenda item 5: Status of National Security Programs as of June 30, 1959, The USIA Program (NSC 5912). Top Secret; Eyes Only. Extracts—7 pp. Eisenhower Library, Whitman File, NSC Records.