Office of the Historian

137. Memorandum From Paul Henze of the National Security Council Staff to the President’s Assistant for National Security Affairs (Brzezinski)1

Washington, June 15, 1977

SUBJECT

  • Reorganization of USIA, etc.

Secretary Vance has submitted his recommendations to the President on reorganization of USIA.2 They are good. State CU, according to this plan, will be amalgamated with a restructured USIA, but the whole entity (perhaps renamed) would be subordinated to State after the pattern of AID. VOA remains part of USIA as it is now, but would of course end up in a closer relationship to State. These recommendations represent a rejection of most of the Stanton Report and are welcome from this viewpoint. My only quarrel is with the subordination of the revised USIA to State. It is to the advantage of the White House to retain its present status as an independent agency, which it has been since 1953. No former USIA director has advocated its amalgamation into State and many Congressmen and Senators take a dim view of this proposition. I have summed up these views in the attached memorandum from you to the President (Tab I).3

At lunch today I discussed all these matters in detail with John Reinhardt. The main advocate at State of subordination, he says, is Assistant Secretary for Cultural Affairs Duffey. Reinhardt prefers independent status, as now, but is prepared to compromise on a relationship with State like that of ACDA. He is very pleased, by the way, at the growing relationship between USIA and the NSC Staff and wishes to expand it.

RECOMMENDATION

That you send the attached memorandum at Tab I to the President.4

  1. Source: Carter Library, National Security Affairs, Brzezinski Material, Agency File, Box 17, State: 6/77. Confidential. Sent for action. A copy was sent to Schechter.↩
  2. See Document 136.↩
  3. Not found attached.↩
  4. Underneath the recommendation, Rick Inderfurth wrote, “I’ve bracketed one sentence I would delete. RI. P.S. This is needed by June 20, at the latest.” David Aaron wrote in the margin, drawing a line to Inderfurth’s first sentence, “Why? DA.”↩