6. Summary of Discussion of a Policy Review Committee Meeting1


  • Europe


  • State:

    • Secretary Vance
    • Arthur Hartman
  • Defense:

    • Harold Brown
    • Charles W. Duncan
    • Gen. William Smith
    • Maynard Glitman
  • Treasury:

    • C. Fred Bergsten
  • CIA:

    • Stansfield Turner
    • Robert Bowie
  • CEA:

    • William Nordhaus
  • NSC:

    • Dr. Zbigniew Brzezinski
    • David Aaron
    • William G. Hyland
    • Robert Hunter
    • Gregory F. Treverton
    • Henry Owen
  • OMB:

    • Bowman Cutter
  • Commerce:

    • Frank Weil
  • ACDA:

    • Leon Sloss
    • John Newhouse

[Omitted here is discussion of the London Summits, consultations with Western Europe, European Communism, and CSCE.]

5. Eastern Europe

There was discussion of the relative merits of PRM-response option (3)—bias toward Eastern European states that are either somewhat liberal internally or somewhat independent of the Soviet Union—versus (4)—efforts to expand contacts across the board without a ranking.2 Brzezinski argued strongly for (3); it provides a standard, recognizing [Page 27] our interest in “polycentrism” and pluralism in the region. Others agreed, although several pointed out that there might be specific reasons for expanding contacts with the GDR. Brzezinski agreed but suggested that the U.S. should look closely at what specific interests were advanced by those contacts. There was specific discussion of Hungary; before consideration can be given to returning the Crown, a judgment about the domestic political cost will be required. Vance noted a general consensus on a policy approach between options (3) and (4) and suggested the need for individual country follow-on studies.

In closing, Vance mentioned the need for a review of RFE and RL program content. The Board for International Broadcasting will be encouraged and aided in undertaking such a review.

Zbigniew Brzezinski
  1. Source: Carter Library, Brzezinski Donated Material, Subject File, Box 24, [Meetings–PRC 12: 4/14/77]. Secret; Sensitive. The meeting took place in the White House Situation Room.
  2. In an April 13 memorandum to Brzezinski, Treverton reported that the PRM–9 responses had been overtaken by preparations for the London Summits. With regard to the Eastern European portion of the PRM response, Treverton stressed that what the administration needed was “a coherent policy where one has not existed.” The PRM response, Treverton continued, was “not bad,” listing four possible approaches: 1) “Bias toward Eastern European states that act with some independence of Moscow;” 2) “Bias toward those that are somewhat more liberal internally;” 3) “Bias toward those that are either relatively independent or liberal;” and 4) “Efforts to expand US contacts across the board to the ‘minimum floor’ now existing only with Poland, Romania, and Yugoslavia.” (Ibid.)