130. Memorandum From the Director of the International Communication Agency (Reinhardt) to the Acting President’s Assistant for National Security Affairs (Aaron)1

SUBJECT

  • Proposed Presidential Initiative: The “Successor Generation” and the NATO Summit

Social, economic and political problems affect the current Atlantic relationship. Beyond that, there is a growing concern that younger Europeans and Americans—members of “the successor generation”—increasingly question the assumptions and values that have sustained that relationship and the effectiveness of at least some democratic institutions. Among younger Europeans, the U.S. is often viewed through the prisms of Vietnam, Watergate and anti-capitalist sentiment.

These problems could usefully be addressed at the highest levels of political leadership, perhaps in relation to the NATO and Economic Summits.

We recommend an initiative to mobilize creative and intellectual resources on both sides of the Atlantic in a kind of “Marshall Plan2 for ideas.” While the initial thrust would come from the U.S., European commitment would—as in the 1940’s—be an essential element.

We propose that at the NATO Summit3 the President explore informally with Schmidt, Callaghan, Trudeau, Thorn and perhaps a few [Page 382] others their reaction to a collective U.S.-European initiative which could:

—provide the basis for a more informed transatlantic dialogue;

—create new opportunities for younger Americans and Europeans to develop the kinds of relationships that benefitted their predecessors;

—reaffirm the validity and relevance of Western values;

—lend impetus to the vitality of democratic institutions.

If the reaction is favorable, the time between the NATO and Economic Summits could be used to develop joint, specific approaches.

Following the Economic Summit,4 the President could plan a speech at an appropriate European venue, such as a major university, to articulate the challenges facing modern societies, affirm the commitment of the West to its democratic institutions and reaffirm the enduring values on which they are based. Major European leaders should be primed to respond immediately and in kind (the Japanese could logically be included in any initiative, in which case commitments of the kind described below could even figure in the Summit itself and the communique).

In his speech the President could:

—Name several outstanding “successor generation” Americans to meet with European counterparts selected by their governments as a first step in a consultative process. The group would develop an agenda for future Atlantic (or OECD) cooperation in this area by the end of 1978. It would form the nucleus of a convocation of Americans and Europeans (hereafter in the memo, one could substitute OECD for “Europe” or “Europeans”) who would meet within 12 months—perhaps in conjunction with an Economic Summit in 1979—to evaluate work in progress and make further recommendations.

—Announce (contingent upon a like European commitment) U.S. support for an institute, possibly named for General Marshall, for promising young Europeans and Americans who are likely to play important roles in the political and intellectual life of their countries. The academy would be governed by a consortium of U.S.-European universities and housed at two universities, one in the United States and the other in Europe. In addition to providing appropriate interdisciplinary training, the academy would offer these future leaders a work experience at the local equivalent of state or federal levels in participat[Page 383]ing countries to broaden both their experience and their understanding of foreign institutions and government processes.

—The President could announce a cooperative effort to bring more Europeans and Americans together through individual and institutional exchanges. Some specific U.S. initiatives in this area (again, to be matched by a like commitment) might be: (1) A 50% increase (to $6 million) in the funding of exchange programs designed to bring together outstanding younger Europeans and Americans active in political, intellectual and cultural life; (2) A program to enhance institutional responsiveness in Europe and the U.S. through (a) exchanges and internships in local and regional administration via grants to state and municipal governments and (b) international seminars to design enhanced service delivery systems from government; (3) Development of internships and seminar programs to assist younger media figures to understand, and ultimately reflect, the transatlantic reality; (4) Creation of grants providing outstanding young European public servants with one-year research fellowships in the U.S.; and (5) Programs to encourage European participation in ACTION volunteer programs, and reciprocal involvement by Americans in like European programs.

—Finally, the President could announce initiatives to enhance the study of U.S. and European languages and cultures. Specific initiatives on the U.S. side might be: (1) U.S. government support for the development of summer training institutes for European university faculty members involved in training teachers of English; (2) Increased HEW (or Department of Education) support of foreign language and area curricula in American universities.

Total additional USG “start-up” funding in FY 1979 is estimated conservatively to be $10 million. Since no one participating country’s contribution is likely to be large enough to capture attention—nor need it—our goal should be the announcement of a joint U.S.-European program totalling $100 million in the first year and announced as enduring over a period of 10 years.

All of the foregoing proposals could usefully be pursued without benefit of involvement by the President. In terms of the demands on his time and energy, however, the costs are low, the symbolic and political value relatively high, and the positive image of transatlantic cooperation presumably useful.

  1. Source: Carter Library, National Security Affairs, Brzezinski Material, Agency File, Box 9, International Communication Agency: 3–8/78. Confidential. A copy was sent to Vance. There is no indication that Aaron saw the memorandum. An attached NSC Correspondence Profile indicates the issue was OBE on July 27. (Ibid.)
  2. See footnote 5, Document 124.
  3. Reference is to the May 30–31 North Atlantic Alliance summit meeting in Washington. The President addressed the North Atlantic Council on May 30. His address is printed in Foreign Relations, 1977–1980, vol. I, Foundations of Foreign Policy, Document 83. Documentation on the summit meeting is scheduled for publication in Foreign Relations, 1977–1980, vol. XXVII, Western Europe.
  4. Reference is to the G–7 Economic Summit scheduled to take place in Bonn July 16–17. For the minutes of the summit meetings, see Foreign Relations, 1977–1980, vol. III, Foreign Economic Policy, Documents 145148. For the text of the declaration issued at the conclusion of the summit meeting and a joint statement on international terrorism, see Department of State Bulletin, September 1978, pp. 2–5.