97. Memorandum From the Deputy Director of the United States Information Agency (Bray) to the Acting Assistant Director, Europe (Scanlan)1
At lunch with George Vest this week, I asked him what—from his perspective—he thought our most important contribution in Western Europe might be.
After reflection, he responded in roughly the following way: influential Europeans, whatever their responsibilities in or out of government and including the intellectual community, confront a series of problems which are—to them at least—novel. Some of the problems are real; some imagined; but all form a “reality”. The menu of problems and their novelty are having a paralytic effect on Western European societies and governments. There is some danger, in these circumstances, that the Western European ship will founder with a flurry of impotent hand-wringing. The most useful thing USIS posts could do would be to bring together competent, imaginative, persuasive and inspirational American thinkers and problem-solvers with homogenous or mixed groups of Western Europeans—in effect, to suggest that there are ways over or around some of their problems.2
An interesting echo of this theme is contained in Athens’ telegram 9269 reporting on a symposium on the future of democracy.3 A separate echo came to me this morning from Professor Friedmann of the American Institute at Munich. He said, again roughly, that West German society and government had lost élan, that there was little yeast (intellectual, moral or cultural), and therefore little sense of future prospects. And finally, of course, Jock Shirley went to Rome preoccupied by this kind of problem in the Italian context.
It can be argued that at least some of our Western European posts are already engaged in creating the kinds of problem-solving “net [Page 281] works” to which George Vest referred. I doubt, however, that we and the posts (not to say EUR and CU) share a self-conscious, articulated strategy.
We have emerged from the last decade with remarkable vitality and élan. We could share it more effectively with Western Europeans. USIA is a natural instrument. The task is important—perhaps more important than other things we do.
I suggest that IEU pick up this subject with George Vest and his deputies—that is to say, at an authoritative level in EUR—and decide whether the phenomenon does indeed deserve priority attention. If it does, clearly we will also need a strategy shared by USIA, EUR, CU and our posts. This phenomenon might, indeed, provide a basic rationale for a PAO Conference.
I would be happy to involve myself in any way you believe useful.
- Source: University of Arkansas Libraries, Special Collections Division, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs Historical Collection (CU), MC 468, Group I, CU Organization and Administration, Series 5: CU Reorganization 1978: CU–USIA Liaison, Box 27, USIA—General, 1976–1978 [1 of 2], folder 12. No classification marking. Copies were sent to Schneidman, Vest, and Hitchcock. Bray sent a copy of the memorandum to Hitchcock under an October 14 handwritten note. In it, Bray commented, “The attached is self-explanatory. It offers at least a potential for inter-institutional cooperation at a moment when friction abounds.” An additional notation in an unknown hand on Bray’s note, dated October 20, reads: “Mr. Roth—Mr. Hitchcock wants your attention called to point 1. of Mr. Bray’s note. MM.”↩
- Hitchcock underlined the word “their” and placed a question mark in the left-hand margin next to this sentence.↩
- Not found.↩