December 28, 1959

To: Robert Bowie

From: Henry A. Kissinger

I sent the enclosed draft to Perkins.
With respect to Harry Ransom's future, I
do not think that there is any need for me
to join you when you talk with Bundy. I
have every confidence that you will represent
my views fairly.

My strong recommendation is that we
appoint Ransom for three years with a definite
statement that there is no chance for reappoint-
ment. This would then give us an opportunity
in the first year to set up the Seminar with
greater reliance on teaching fellows, and in
the second year to start looking for new assis-
tance, perhaps on the basis of a joint appoint-
ment with an existing department. By the
third year we should be in fairly good shape.
The minimum, it would seem to me, should be a
two year appointment.

December 28, 1959

Mr. James A. Perkins, Vice President
Carnegie Corporation of New York
589 Fifth Avenue
New York 17, New York

Dear Jim:

I am enclosing a draft of a proposal for the Defense
Policy Seminar as well as a budget. I have not had a chance to
get it cleared by everyone concerned because of the Christmas
holiday, but I think I am safe in saying that this is the kind of
proposal that will be acceptable to everyone here, with minor modi-
fications. I am sending it to you so that you can consider it
within the Foundation. Perhaps you can give us a preliminary re-
action as to whether this makes any sense at all.

The deficit shown on the budget is somewhat larger than
you had indicated you were going to support. This can be adjusted,
however, by reducing the fellowship money or by raising some addi-
tional funds elsewhere. Of course, the best solution would be for
you to underwrite the whole thing.

As you know, the Defense Policy Seminar is given under
the auspices of the Graduate School of Public Administration. I
am sure that Don Price will want to talk to you about the final
details, assuming that you are interested.

Best regards.

Draft

Request for Support for the
Harvard Defense Policy Seminar

I. The Need.

The importance of the subject of national security hardly requires restatement. Over half of our national budget goes for national security expenditures. Many of the decisions of our foreign policy are directly or indirectly affected by our choices on national security. Whatever assessment one makes about the future of international relations, the situation is hardly likely to change, for if there is to be a relaxation of tension, negotiation on arms control would seem to be a primary requirement, and this in turn presupposes an understanding of the goals of our security effort.

There continue to be a number of major deficiencies in our
consideration of national security:

(A) An inadequate supply of adequately trained personnel for
policy-making decisions.

(B) An inadequate number of private persons to form either an
intelligent public opinion or to supply personnel for government.

(C) An inadequate decision-making process on national security issues.

The result is that the disparity between those with experience
in the field and those who have less experience becomes ever wider and
also that the few people with experience are put under so much pressure
that they cannot make the contribution of which they are capable. Many
of these difficulties are due to the fact that there has not been
injected into American academic life an understanding of national security
policy during the period when our present policy-makers and high civil
servants were getting their education. While this is understandable as
to the past it will become a source of increasing weakness for the future.

II. The Present Harvard Program.

(A) The Harvard Defense Policy Seminar represents an attempt to deal with this problem. It was started in 1954-55 as an experimental project with the following purposes:

(1) To reach the minds of the ablest students in all Harvard Graduate Schools during their formative years and to capture their imagination so that they would be likely to enter into various projects related to national security either in the field of research or in actual operation.

operation.

related to national security either in the field of research or in actual
imagination so that they would be likely to enter into various projects
Graduate Schools during their formative years and to capture their

(I) To reach the minds of the affected students in all Harvard

(A) The Harvard Defense Policy Seminar represents an attempt to
des with this problem. It was started in 1954-55 as an experimental

to the best it will become a source of increasing usefulness for the future.
senates were getting their education. While this is underappreciable as
policy during the period when our present policy-makers and high civil
injected into American academic life an understanding of national security
of these difficulties are due to the fact that there has not been
that they cannot make the contribution of which they are capable. Many
also that the few people with experience are but under so much brazenne
in the field and those who have less experience becomes ever wider and
The result is that the disparity between those with experience
issues.

(C) You inadequate decision-making process on national security
intelligent public opinion or to annul personnel for government.

(B) You inadequate number of private persons to form either an
official public opinion or to annul personnel for government.

Policy-making decisions.

(A) You inadequate annul of adequately trained personnel for
consideration of national security.

There continue to be a number of major deficiencies in our
an understanding of the goals of our security effort.

would seem to be a primary redetermination, and this in turn breathmoose
there is to be a relaxation of tension, negotiation on arms control
tional relations, the attitude is hardly likely to change, for it
security. Whatever assessment one makes about the future of interna-
bility are directly or indirectly affected by our choices on national
national security expenditures. Many of the decisions of our foreign
regimes restatement. Over half of our national budget goes for
The importance of the subject of national security hardly

I. The Need.

Harvard Defense Policy Seminar
Request for Support for the

Draft

School and the Business School.

In addition, because of our selectivity, we have been able to get an
Harvard that includes participants from four Harvard Graduate Schools.

(B) **Combination of the Seminar.** The seminar is the only one at each session.

addition to the people taking it, there are at least 32 to 30 auditors at
in the Seminar has gone from 30 in 1927 to 33 in 1928 to 31 in 1929. In

(A) **Its Size.** In the past three years the number of participants

### III. Special Problems of a Defense Policy Seminar at Harvard.

Please allopay prepared at Harvard, of which a coda is attached.

VII of these seminars offer instruction closely pertaining to the

trained at Harvard.

Harvard materials and originally instructed by an OED civil servant

(4) George Washington University, presenting a seminar on

Harvard-trained officers.

presenting seminars to cadets naming Harvard materials and instructed by

(3) The U.S. Military Academy and the U.S. Virgus Academy.

$2 million dedicated to military studies at Ohio State.

committee, and handsomely financed out of the Merlon Fund now approximately

(2) Ohio State University, sponsored by an institute-departmental

combination Grants.

Harvard) by the Law School, with some university financing and some

(1) University of Wisconsin, sponsored (as originally at

essentially on the Harvard model). Some of these are as follows:

the similarity at other universities of Defense Policy Seminars based

(C) One of the dy-products of the Defense Policy Seminar has been

continued high level of serious student interest.

applicants is so large that 40 percent must be turned away. There is a
and a very few seniors at Harvard College. The number of unclassified

School of Public Administration, the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences
fifty-two students from the Law School, the Business School, the Graduate

(B) The Defense Policy Seminar as it now exists accomplishes

Policy Program.

(3) To encourage research by the participants in the Defense

of national security policy.

(2) To encourage faculty participation in the serious study

- 3 -

- 3 -

(C) The Seminar is considered by the military services as the key factor in projects for defense studies, in civilian universities. Both the Military Academy and the Air Force Academy give courses based upon our seminar, using our materials and taught by instructors trained by us. All three services are represented by officer/students. Some of these come to Harvard for the express purpose of getting this instruction.

(D) **Conduct of the Seminar.** The Seminar in the past two years has established highly rigorous requirements. It is the only seminar that requires both an examination and a major paper. It probably requires more classroom work than any other seminar. Every participant, in addition to attending the weekly plenary session, must participate in a sub-group. The requirements of the sub-group are roughly analogous to those of an ordinary seminar; that is, there are special lectures by the staff and from the end of the first term onwards the students must present papers.

(E) Since the subject matter of national security resides to such an important extent in the minds of the people with experience, it is particularly important to bring guest speakers with experience to the Seminar.

(F) Teaching materials do not exist and have to be created; and Harvard does this task for itself and other similar programs in other universities — not only those now operating but others that are contemplated.

(G) There is an unusual need for junior staff members, "teaching fellows," to consult with students, engage in small group sessions, and monitor student theses. Furthermore, experience shows that these junior staff members are the ones most likely to be drawn into careers in Defense. All but one of our Teaching Fellows have been so drawn.

For all these reasons, the Harvard Defense Policy Seminar requires more staffing and a different structure from the usual seminars conducted at Harvard.

#### IV. Future Needs.

(A) In addition to continuing the Seminar as described, its value could be enhanced by fellowships in the following categories:

(1) Each year there are a number of students showing great interest in the field and working on first class papers. If some of these could be kept on as teaching fellows or as combination teaching-research fellows it would both improve the conduct of the Seminar and expand the base of available talent.

expand the pace of available talent.

research fellowships would help improve the conduct of the Seminar and these could be kept on as teaching fellowships as compensation teaching-interest in the field and working on first class papers. It some of

conflict be enhanced by fellowships in the following categories:

(A) In addition to continuing the Seminar as described, it alone

## IV. Future Needs.

at Harvard.

more attracting and a different structure from the usual seminars conducted for all these reasons, the Harvard Defense Policy Seminar requires

Defense. VII put one of our Teaching Fellows have been so drawn.

staff members are the ones most likely to be drawn into cases in monitor student these. Furthermore, experience shows that these junior fellowships, to consult with students, engage in small group sessions, and

(C) There is an annual need for junior staff members, "teaching

contemplated.

(B) Teaching materials do not exist and have to be created; and

Seminar.

is particularly important to bring great speakers with experience to the and an important extent in the minds of the people with experience, it

(E) Since the subject matter of national security relates to

present before.

staff and thus the end of the first term oversees the students that require an ordinary seminar; that is, there are special lectures by the various groups. The requirements of the group are roughly analogous to in addition to attending the weekly biweekly session, must participate in requires more classroom work than and other seminar. Early participant, that requires both an examination and a major paper. It properly

has categorized highly rigorous requirements. It is the only seminar

(D) Conduct of the Seminar. The Seminar in the best two years

instruct.

of these come to Harvard for the express purpose of getting this
by na. VII three services are represented by officer/students. Some
about our seminar, using our materials and taught by instructors trained
both the Military Academy and the Air Force Academy give complete proof
key factor in projects for defense studies, in civilian universities.

- 3 -

(2) It should be possible to encourage qualified graduate students in the sciences and other fields to participate in the work of the Defense Policy Seminar and therefore to take an interest in national security matters at a formative stage of their thinking. In special cases this requires some kind of fellowship.

(3) We might attempt to interest young post-Ph.D. scientists, for example at the Lincoln Laboratories, to participate in the Defense Policy Seminar through a suitable fellowship.

Thus, for rather modest sums a significantly increased potential of the existing program could be realized.

## V. The Extent of the Contribution.

For the past two years the Defense Policy Seminar has had no external support and has had to be carried almost exclusively by Harvard University. Contributions have been made by the Faculty of Arts & Sciences, the Graduate School of Public Administration, the Law School, the Business School and the Center for International Affairs. In any future program, the following items would continue to be contributed by Harvard University:

(A) The services of the Director, valued at about $6,000 (half-time).

(B) The services of Professor Leach, who attends all sessions and is to all intents and purposes a regular member of the Defense Policy staff, and whose salary is now paid by the Law School. I would estimate his contribution at $4,000.

(C) The Graduate School of Public Administration contribution of $3,000 for overhead expenses.

(D) The Center for International Affairs contribution of half of the salary of the Assistant preparing teaching materials, amounting to about $2,500.

(E) Harvard charges no overhead.

Attached is a budget for the Defense Policy Seminar for the academic year 1959-60, as well as a projected budget which adds to the present level funds to provide for the fellowships mentioned above.

present level funds to provide for the fellowships mentioned above.
academic year 1929-30, as well as a projected budget which adds to the
attached is a budget for the Defense Policy Seminar for the

(R) Harvard charges no overcharges.

to about $2,200.

(O) The Graduate School of Public Administration, amounting

(D) The Center for International Affairs contribution of $10,000

(E) $2,000 for overhead expenses.

(C) The Graduate School of Public Administration contribution of
contribution at $4,000.

and whose salary is now paid by the Law School. I would estimate his
is to all students and purposes a regular member of the Defense Policy staff.

(B) The services of Professor Leuch, who attends all sessions and

(A) The services of the Director, joined at about $2,000 (full-time).

Harvard University:

income program, the following items would continue to be contributed by
the Business School and the Center for International Affairs. In any
Science, the Graduate School of Public Administration, the Law School,
University. Contributions have been made by the Department of Arts &

exterior and has had to be carried almost exclusively by Harvard
for the past two years the Defense Policy Seminar has had no

A. The Extent of the Contribution.

Yona, for further modest amounts a significantly increased potential

Policy Seminar through a single single fellowship.

(3) We might attempt to interest some post-doctoral scientists.

specialist cases the need for some kind of fellowship.

national security matters at a legislative stage of their thinking. In
of the Defense Policy Seminar and therefore to take an interest in
students in the sciences and other fields to participate in the work

(3) It should be possible to encourage dissatisfied graduate

- 4 -

February 26, 1960

Mr. John W. Gardner, President
The Carnegie Corporation
589 Fifth Avenue
New York 17, New York

Dear John:

Henry Kissinger tells me that it is now appropriate
for me to make a formal request on behalf of the Graduate School
of Public Administration for the Defense Policy Seminar. This
Seminar is being given under the auspices of the Graduate School
of Public Administration, and I am the officer of the University
who is responsible for it.

Henry has already covered our thinking with respect to
the Seminar in his letter to you of December 28, 1959. I would
simply like to add my own conviction that an activity which takes
over half of our national budget and which affects so many aspects
of our national policy must be an essential part of our program
here. It seems to me that we have a dual task, in conducting
research as well as in training individuals who will either concern
themselves with these activities directly or who will help in
training others.

I understand that Henry has been talking about the sum
of $25 Thousand a year for three years, and I am delighted to make
a formal request herewith.

Kind regards.

Dean
Donald K. Price

Sincerely yours,

Kind regards.

a format I resent particularly.
of $52 thousand a year for three years, and I am delighted to make
I understand that Henry has been talking about the sum

that we are responsible for.
of Public Administration, and I am the officer of the University
Seminar is being given under the rubric of the Graduate School
of Public Administration for the Defense Policy Seminar. This
for me to make a format redact on behalf of the Graduate School
Henry Krasinger tells me that it is now appropriate
who is responsible for it.

Dear John:

New York 13, New York
288 Fifth Avenue
The Carnegie Foundation
Mr. John W. Gardner, President

February 5, 1960

CARNEGIE CORPORATION OF NEW YORK

589 FIFTH AVENUE, NEW YORK 17, N.Y.

March 21, 1960

Mr. Nathan M. Pusey, President
Harvard University
Cambridge 38, Massachusetts

Dear Mr. Pusey:

We are glad to be able to tell you that, at a recent
meeting of the board of trustees of the Corporation, the
following resolution was adopted:

RESOLVED: That the sum of seventy-five thousand
dollars ($75,000), payable $25,000 a year for three
years beginning with 1959-60, be, and it hereby is,
appropriated to HARVARD UNIVERSITY toward support
of the Defense Policy Seminar.

The dates in the resolution refer to the fiscal years
of the Corporation, which end September 30, and not to the
years in which the money is to be used by the recipient.

Our treasurer is being authorized to make payments on
or about the following dates: $25,000 July 1, 1960
25,000 July 1, 1961
25,000 July 1, 1962

The Corporation plans to release news of this grant in
an announcement to the national press for morning papers on
March 28. If you wish to arrange fuller publicity locally,
please do not release before this date.

FA:nf
Enclosure

Copy to: Mr. Don Price
✓Mr. Henry A. Kissinger

## Publicity

Recipients may make public announcement of Corporation grants at their discretion. Occasionally, however, we issue press releases following board meetings. When we do so, we ask recipients to respect our release date. In such cases appropriate information is contained in the letter of notification from the Secretary.

## Payments

When a grant covers a period of years, the trustees' resolution states the years in which payments are to be made. These refer to the fiscal years of the Corporation, which start October 1. The resolution does not specify the academic years in which the grant is to be spent. It is our policy to permit recipients to carry over balances from one year to the next so long as the money is spent for the purpose intended within a reasonable length of time.

The schedule of payments usually appears in the letter of notification.

## Reports

The trustees and officers of the Corporation are interested in following the de-

velopment of projects. The Secretary therefore requests annual progress reports, usually in May or September. Ordinarily the request is for a financial statement and a two- or three-page summary of activities.

These summaries are often used as a basis for articles in the Carnegie QUARTERLY. We therefore hope that the reports will include information on significant developments and other interesting items which might lend themselves to a news-worthy account.

We are interested also in receiving photographs of projects in action, which we may be able to use in our annual report.

One copy of any book, monograph, or article which may result from a grant should be sent to the Corporation.

## Acknowledgments

Some acknowledgment of Carnegie support should appear in any published material. The following form is suggested:

This book (report, study, survey) was made possible (in part) by funds granted by Carnegie Corporation of New York. The statements made and views expressed are solely the responsibility of the authors.

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
GRADUATE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

OFFICE OF THE DEAN

LITTAUER CENTER
CAMBRIDGE 38, MASSACHUSETTS

October 10, 1961

Professor Henry A. Kissinger
6 Divinity Avenue

Dear Henry:

Attached is the correspondence
requesting a report on the Defense
Policy Seminar.

If you could let me have a
draft in sufficient time to meet
their deadline, I would be very grateful.

DKP:B

Enclosures

November 8, 1961

Dean Don K. Price
Littauer Center
Harvard University

Dear Don:

Here, belatedly because I have been
under the weather, is the report for the Carnegie
Corporation grant to the Defense Policy Seminar.
It is due on November 15th, and I apologize for
my tardy response. I have left it as a draft for
any changes you may wish to make.

If there is any other information
you would like, please let me know.

Kind regards.

November 8, 1961

DRAFT OF REPORT TO CARNEGIE CORPORATION

The purposes of the Defense Policy Seminar are as follows:

(1) To reach the ablest students in all of the Harvard Graduate Schools during their formative years and to inspire them to enter into various projects related to national security, either in the field of research or in actual operation.

(2) To encourage faculty participation in the serious study of national security policy.

(3) To encourage research by the participants in the Defense Studies Program.

Since the fall of 1960, a major reconstruction of the Defense Policy Seminar has taken place under the grant of the Carnegie Corporation. Part of this change becomes apparent from the breakdown of participants which is attached. In 1959, the Seminar included seventeen participants from the Harvard Business School, all but four of whom were professional officers at Harvard for a special course in logistics. Starting in 1960, the Seminar has been confined to military personnel who are of the caliber usually attending one of the war colleges or engaged in especially responsible academic work, such as teaching at the military academies. At the same time, standards for other students have been substantially raised. For example, no Law School student with less than a B average is considered. Despite these increasingly high standards, both applications and enrollment have substantially increased. Though the number of participants from the Harvard Business School has dropped, that from the Graduate School of Public Administration and the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences has increased.

atration and the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences has increased.
School has dropped, that from the Graduate School of Public Affairs
increased. Though the number of participants from the Harvard Business
high standards, both applications and enrollment have substantially
with less than a B average is considered. Despite these increasingly
have been substantially raised. For example, no Law School student
military academien. At the same time, standards for other students
in especially reasonable academic work, and as teaching at the
of the caliper namely attending one of the war colleges or engaged
in 1960, the Seminar has been confined to military personnel who are
officers at Harvard for a special course in logistics. Starting
from the Harvard Business School, all but four of whom were professional
which is attached. In 1968, the Seminar included seventeen participants
part of this change becomes apparent from the breakdown of participants
Policy Seminar has taken place under the grant of the Carnegie Corporation.
Since the fall of 1960, a major reconstruction of the Defense
Studies Program.

(3) To encourage research by the participants in the Defense
international security policy.

(3) To encourage faculty participation in the serious study
in the field of research or in actual operation.

to enter into various projects related to national security, either
Graduate Schools during their formative years and to inspire them

(1) To reach the largest students in all of the Harvard
The purpose of the Defense Policy Seminar are as follows:

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
CARNegie CORPORATION

November 8, 1961

-2-

The Seminar in 1960-61 had forty-seven participants out of sixty-three applications. This year, sixty-six out of one hundred eleven applicants were accepted. In addition, there were seventy-two registered auditors in 1960-61 and fifty-nine in 1961-62. In addition to the registered auditors from Harvard, an average of ten members of companies dealing with defense and from scientific laboratories in the Boston area attend the Seminar. These people are also free to utilize the research facilities of the Defense Studies Program.

The academic level of the Seminar has been raised partly by improvement in personnel, partly because of the more general availability of research materials.

The Seminar is conducted in the following manner: there is a formal weekly session of the entire Seminar, following the enclosed assignment sheet. The topics of these weekly sessions are divided into four major areas: (a) a theoretical discussion of the relationship between military force and foreign policy; (b) the organizational problems of national security; (c) doctrinal problems of national security; (d) the relationship between national security policy and foreign policy.

About thirty per cent of the Seminar sessions are conducted by Professor Kissinger; the remainder are conducted by distinguished visitors to enable the Seminar participants to make a first-hand acquaintance with policy makers. In 1960-61, these visitors included: Walt W. Rostow; Herbert Dinerstein; Henry Rowen; Robert Amory, Jr.; Lt. General James M. Gavin; General Thomas D. White; Pierre Mendes-France and Herman Kahn.

-3-

In 1961-62, they will include: Roswell Gilpatric; Senators Henry Jackson; Charles Hitch; Harold Brown; General Maxwell Taylor; Roger Hilsman and Carl Kaysen. Typically, distinguished visitors remain for an informal seminar with senior faculty members and a few selected students.

The weekly Seminars are supplemented by bi-weekly sub-group meetings, each dealing with one aspect of defense policy throughout the year. Each student is required to attend one of these sub-groups. In 1960-61, they covered the following subjects: Defense Organization; Strategic Doctrine and Disarmament; Foreign Relations--Alliance Policy. The chairmen of the groups were: Franklin Balch, George A. Kelly and Dr. Harry Howe Ransom.

This year, the sub-groups are dealing with: Local Wars and Crises; Strategic Doctrine; Policy-Making; Arms Control. The chairmen of the groups are: Franklin Balch, Maurice Feld, Dr. Morton Halperin and George A. Kelly.

These sub-groups double the effective course work for each registered student. Moreover, the students taking the Seminar are the only ones in the graduate schools of Harvard who are required to do both a term paper and a final examination.

The following by-products of the Seminar deserve mention:

(1) Senior faculty members attend most of the full sessions of the Seminar and use its materials for their own work.

(2) At least ten graduates of the program are in responsible positions in the government.

positions in the Government.

(2) At least ten graduates of the program are in responsible of the Seminar and use its materials for their own work.

(1) Senior faculty members attend most of the full sessions. The following products of the Seminar deserve mention:

do both a term paper and a final examination.
only once in the Graduate schools of Harvard who are required to
graceful student. Moreover, the students taking the Seminar are the
These sup-Groups double the effective course work for each re-
and George V. Kelly.

of the Groome are: Franklin Bache, Maurice Feld, Dr. Morton Heberlein
Gross; Strategic Doctrine; Policy-Making; War Control. The chairman
This year, the sup-Groups are dealing with: Local War and
and Dr. Harry Howe Rameon.

The chairman of the Groome were: Franklin Bache, George V. Kelly
Strategic Doctrine and Disarmament; Foreign Relations--Villance Policy.
In 1960-61, they covered the following subjects: Defense Organization;
the year. Each student is required to attend one of these sup-Groups.
meetings, each dealing with one aspect of defense policy throughout
The weekly Seminars are supplemented by bi-weekly sup-Groups
two selected students.

remain for an informal seminar with senior faculty members and a
Roger Hilman and Carl Kayson. Tabically, distinguished visitors
Henry Jackson; Charles Hitch; Harold Brown; General Maxwell Taylor;
In 1961-62, they will include: Russell Gilbaric; Senator

-3-

-4-

[N]

(3) The programs in defense policy of other universities are staffed by Defense Policy Seminar "alumni."

(4) The Supplementary Bibliography of the Seminar, which is attached, is being used as the basis for similar programs at other universities: the University of Wisconsin; Ohio State University; the United States Military Academy at West Point and the United States Air Force Academy.

(5) The library of the Defense Studies Program maintains a clip file on defense issues. This is being used by students, faculty members, and members of defense industries and scientific laboratories located in the area.

(6) Although the Defense Studies Program does not directly sponsor publications, the following books and articles were published by members of its staff during the terms of the 1960-61 grant:

**Kissinger:** "Arms Control, Inspection and Surprise Attack," *Foreign Affairs*, July, 1960.

"Limited War: Nuclear or Conventional? A Reappraisal," *Daedalus*, Fall, 1960.

"The New Cult of Neutralism," *The Reporter*, November 24, 1960.

"The Next Summit Meeting," *Harper's*, December, 1960.

**The Necessity for Choice:** *Prospects of American Foreign Policy*, Harper & Bros, January, 1961.

"For an Atlantic Confederacy," *The Reporter*, February 2, 1961.

**Ransom:** "Secret Mission in an Open Society," *New York Times Magazine*, May 21, 1961.

During the academic year, 1960-61, Dr. Ransom completed a book tentatively titled *National Security and the Democratic Process*, to be published by Doubleday-Anchor Books in 1962.

November 13, 1961

Miss Florence Anderson, Secretary
Carnegie Corporation of New York
589 Fifth Avenue
New York 17, New York

Dear Miss Anderson:

In reply to your letter of October 4 addressed to President Pusey, I am happy to report to you on the work done by the Defense Policy Seminar of the Graduate School of Public Administration, under the direction of Professor Henry A. Kissinger.

COPY

Miss Florence Anderson, Secretary - 2

November 13, 1961

standards for other students have been substantially raised. For
example, no Law School student with less than a B average is con-
sidered. Despite these increasingly high standards, both applica-
tions and enrollment have substantially increased. Though the
number of participants from the Harvard Business School has
dropped, that from the Graduate School of Public Administration
and the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences has increased.

About thirty percent of the Seminar sessions are conducted
by Professor Kissinger; the remainder are conducted by distinguished
visitors to enable the Seminar participants to make a first-hand
acquaintance with policy makers. In 1960-61, these visitors in-
cluded: Walt W. Rostow; Herbert Dinerstein; Henry Rowen; Robert
Amory, Jr.; Lt. General James M. Gavin; General Thomas D. White;
Pierre Mendes-France and Herman Kahn.

In 1961-62, they will include: Roswell Gilpatric; Senator Henry Jackson; Charles Hitch; Harold Brown; General Maxwell Taylor; Roger Hilsman and Carl Kaysen. Typically, distinguished visitors remain for an informal seminar with senior faculty members and a few selected students.

COPY

Miss Florence Anderson, Secretary - 3

November 13, 1961

The weekly Seminars are supplemented by bi-weekly sub-group meetings, each dealing with one aspect of defense policy throughout the year. Each student is required to attend one of these sub-groups. In 1960-61, they covered the following subjects: Defense Organization; Strategic Doctrine and Disarmament; Foreign Relations-Alliance Policy. The chairmen of the groups were: Franklin Balch, George A. Kelly and Dr. Harry Howe Ransom.

This year, the sub-groups are dealing with: Local Wars and Crises; Strategic Doctrine; Policy-Making; Arms Control. The chairmen of the groups are: Franklin Balch, Maury Feld, Dr. Morton Halperin and George A. Kelly.

COPY

COPY

1960-61 Grant: were distributed by members of its staff during the terms of the directly adjacent libraries, the following books and articles:

(a) Although the Defense Studies Program does not laboratories located in the area, faculty members, and members of defense industries and scientific a chip file on defense issues. This is being used by students.

(b) The library of the Defense Studies Program maintains United States Air Force Academy.

The United States Military Academy at West Point and the other universities: the University of Wisconsin; Ohio State University attached, is being used as the base for similar programs at

(c) The Subsidiary Bibliography of the Seminar, which are staffed by Defense Policy Seminar "alumni."

(d) The programs in defense policy of other universities are staffed by Defense Policy Seminar "alumni."

(e) The programs in defense policy of other universities are staffed by Defense Policy Seminar "alumni."

(f) At least ten graduates of the program are in

fields of the Seminar and use its materials for their own work.

(1) Senior faculty members attend most of the full sea-

both a term paper and a final examination. only once in the graduate schools of Harvard who are required to do registered students. Moreover, the students taking the Seminar are the these sup-Gronbe couple the effective course work for each

Hulbert and George V. Kelly. clusters of the Gronbe are: Franklin Beach, Mary Feld, Dr. Merton and Crisie; Strategic Doctrine; Policy-Making; Arms Control. The Tite year, the sup-Gronbe are dealing with: local Wars

were: Franklin Beach, George V. Kelly and Dr. Harry Howe Gamson.

Foreign Relations--Villance Policy. The clusters of the Gronbe Jecta: Defense Organization; Strategic Doctrine and Strategy; these sup-Gronbe. In 1960-61 they covered the following ap-

Mistie Florence Underwood, Secretary - 3

November 13, 1961

HARVARD UNIVERSITY

[r]

Miss Florence Anderson, Secretary - 4

November 13, 1961

*The Necessity for Choice: Prospects of American Foreign Policy*, Harper & Bros, January, 1961

During the academic year, 1960-61, Dr. Ransom completed a book tentatively titled *National Security and the Democratic Process* to be published by Doubleday-Anchor Books in 1962.

**Kelly:** "The Political Background of the French A-Bomb," *Orbis*, Vol. 4, Fall, 1960

"Revolutionary War and Psychological Action," *Military Review*, Vol. 40, October 1960; also published in *Revue Militaire Generale*, February, 1961.

"Democratic Morale and National Ideology," *Military Review*, May, 1961.

"Arms Control and the Military Establishment," *Military Review*, Vol. 41, January, 1961; also published in *Survival*, May-June, 1961.

COPY

C
O
P
Y

baptized in <u>SARATOF</u>, May-June, 1961.
<u>Military Review</u>, Vol. 41, January, 1961; also
"Arms Control and the Military Establishment."

Review, May, 1961.
"Democratic Morale and National Ideology," *Military Review*, May, 1961.

baptized in *Saratof*, May-June, 1961.
*Military Review*, Vol. 40, October 1960; also
"Revolutionary War and Psychological Action."

Orbis*, Aof. 4*, Fall, 1960
"The Political Background of the French V-Bomb,"

Douglas-Wharner Books in 1963.
and the Democratic Process to be fulfilled by
brought a book tentatively titled *National Security*
During the academic year, 1960-61. Dr. Rameau com-

Mussing, May 31, 1961.
"Secret Mission in an Open Society," *New York Times*

Rameau, May 31, 1961.
"Secret Mission in an Open Society," *New York Times*

February 3, 1961.
"For an Atlantic Confederacy," *The Reporter*.

Foreign Policy, Harber & Bros, January, 1961
The Necessity for Choice: Prospects of American

"The Next Summit Meeting," *Harber's* December, 1960

3rd, 1960.
"The New Critic of Neutrality," *The Reporter*, November

Deedings, Fall, 1960
"Limited War: Nuclear or Conventional? A Reassessment."

Foreign Affairs, July, 1960.
"Arms Control, Inspection and Submarine Attack,"

HARVARD UNIVERSITY

[x]

Miss Florence Anderson, Secretary-5

November 13, 1961

I attach a table showing the student participation in the
Seminar since 1959-1960, and a summary financial statement for the
fiscal year 1960-1961.

Also attached are a copy of the bibliography used in the
current Seminar, and a schedule of autumn meetings.

If there is any further information I can supply, I hope
you will let me know.

DKP:B

Enclosures

COPY

COPY

Enclosures

Dean
Don K. Price

Yours sincerely,

You will let me know.

It there is any further information I can supply, I hope

current seminar, and a schedule of autumn meetings.

Visa attached are a copy of the bibliography need in the

tences year 1960-1961.

Seminar since 1929-1960, and a summary financial statement for the
I attach a table showing the student participation in the

Miles Florence Anderson, Secretary-2

November 13, 1961

HARVARD UNIVERSITY

[r]

December 9, 1962

(1) To reach the ablest students in all of the Harvard Graduate Schools during their formative years and to inspire them to enter into various fields related to national security, either in research or in actual operation.

Since the fall of 1960, a major reconstruction of the Defense Policy Seminar has taken place under the grant of the Carnegie Corporation. Part of this change becomes apparent from the breakdown of participants which is attached. In 1959, the Seminar included seventeen participants from the Harvard Business School, all but four of whom were professional officers at Harvard for a special course in logistics. Starting in 1960, the Seminar has been confined to military personnel who are of the caliber usually attending one of the war colleges or engaged in especially responsible academic work, such as teaching at the military academies. At the same time, standards for other students have been substantially raised. For example, no Law School student with less than a B average is considered. Despite these increasingly high standards, both applications and enrollment have substantially increased. The number of participants from the Harvard Business School and the Law School has dropped, and that from the Graduate School of

-2-

Public Administration and the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences has increased as indicated.

| School | 1959-60 | 1960-61 | 1961-62 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Law School | 20 | 27 | 25 |
| Business School | 17 | 6 | 4 |
| GSPA | 9 | 6 | 16 |
| GSAS | 3 | 1 | 8 |
| College | 2 | 2 | 8 |

The Seminar in 1961-62 had sixty-six participants out of one hundred and eleven applications. This year fifty-six out of seventy-two applicants were accepted. In addition, there were fifty-nine registered auditors in 1961-62. In addition to the registered auditors from Harvard, an average of ten members of companies dealing with defense and from scientific laboratories in the Boston area attend the Seminar. These people are also free to utilize the research facilities of the Defense Studies Program.

This seminar deals with strategy and policy making for United States national security. The central theme is the relationship of force and foreign policy in an age of accelerating technology and revolutionary developments in military science and world politics. Attention is divided between two main categories: (1) Policy-making and Organization, and (2) Military Strategy and Foreign Policy. Emphasis is placed upon both the substance of national security policy and the governmental process by which this policy is made. Under "Policy-making and Organization,"

* The number of law students is set arbitrarily by the staff of the Defense Policy Seminar. The number is about half the number attending. In addition to those taking the Seminar there is a group of registered auditors, they do the work of the Seminar but they do not take the final.

** The reason for the decline is that we no longer accept officers primarily here to study logistics.

-3-

the seminar is concerned with the following topics, among others:

governmental institutions for integrating national policy, Department of
Defense organization, the defense budgetary process, the role of Congress
and the public in defense policy-making, and the role of intelligence in
national decision making. Under "Military Strategy and Foreign Policy,"
the list of topics explored includes: strategic doctrine and foreign
policy, NATO policy and arms control. A copy of the syllabus of the
course is attached.

About half of the Seminar sessions are conducted by Professor Kissinger and Dr. Halperin, the remainder are conducted by distinguished visitors to enable the Seminar participants to make a first-hand acquaintance with policy makers. In 1961-62, these visitors included: Roger Hilsman; Harold Brown; Charles J. Hitch; William Kaufmann; Roswell Gilpatric; Henry Rowen; and Fritz Erler.

In 1962-63, they will include: Raymond Cline; Merton J. Peck; Bernard Brodie; Roswell Gilpatric; and Malcolm Hoag.

The weekly Seminars are supplemented by bi-weekly sub-group meetings, each dealing with one aspect of defense policy throughout the year. Each student is required to attend one of these sub-groups. In 1961-62, they covered the following subjects: Local Wars and Crises; Strategic Doctrine; Policy-Making; Arms control. The chairmen of the groups are: Douglas Bailey, Maurice Feld, Dr. Morton Halperin and George A. Kelly.

This year the sub-groups are as follows:

1) Dr. Morton Halperin, Politics and Defense.

The group considers the politics of defense policy making in
the United States in the post-war period. In the first semester various

-4-

kinds of decisions (including those on strategic doctrine, arms control and defense budgets) are being discussed. In the second semester the role of particular groups (including the military services, scientists and Congress) will be discussed.

2) Mr. Maury D. Feld, Organization, and Policy Making.

This section studies the relationship between organizational forms and decision-making processes within the U. S. defense and alliance system. Various theories of organization being examined with reference to how they fit conventional descriptions of "civilian", "military", "national" and "alliance" behaviour. For their term paper, students are expected to do a case study of some crisis in national security policy, examining what actually did happen in the light of the concepts discussed during section meetings.

3) Mr. George A. Kelly, Arms Control and the Foundations of International Security.

The group treats the objective conditions of the post-nuclear age which conduce toward or away from the stability of the world system, including the various conceptions of what a secure system is. Within this context the fundamental political and technical aspects of arms control are being examined, with special emphasis on: a) their feasibility; b) their ability to accrue security; c) their relation to the evolving patterns of the Cold War.

4) Dr. Douglas L. Bailey, Strategic Doctrine.

This group considers the components of and alternatives to United States strategic doctrine: e.g. containment, coexistence, or

-5-

liberation; counterforce vs. counter-population; vulnerability. The
first half year concentrates on the relation of defense policy to foreign
policy objectives and the problems of formulating strategy which is both
appropriate to the particular needs of defense and compatible with other
domestic and foreign objectives.

These sub-groups double the effective course work for each re-
gistered student. Moreover, the students taking the Seminar are the only
ones in the graduate schools of Harvard who are required to do both a
term paper and a final examination.

1) At least ten graduates of the program are in responsible positions in the government, including one who is a Special Assistant to Assistant Secretary of Defense Paul H. Nitze.

2) The programs in defense policy of other universities are staffed by Defense Policy Seminar "alumni."

3) The Supplementary Bibliography of the Seminar, which is attached, is being used as the basis for similar programs at other universities: the University of Wisconsin; Ohio State University; the United States Military Academy at West Point and the United States Air Force Academy.

4) The library of the Defense Studies Program maintains a clip file on defense issues. This is being used by students, faculty members, and members of defense industries and scientific laboratories located in the area.

5) Although the Defense Studies Program does not directly sponsor publication, the following books and articles were published by members of its staff during the terms of the 1961-62 grant:

**Kissinger:** "Reflections on China," Reporter, November, 1962.

"The Unsolved Problems of European Defense," Foreign Affairs, July, 1962.

"L'evolution de la doctrine strategique aux Etats-Unis," Politique Etrangere, No. 2, 1962.

**Halperin:** (with Thomas C. Schelling) Strategy and Arms Control (New York: The Twentieth Century Fund, 1961).

Contributor to Arms Control, Disarmament, and National Security (New York: George Braziller Inc., 1961)

Limited War in the Nuclear Age (John Wiley & Sons, 1962) In Press.

"Defense on the New Frontier," The New Republic, October 2, 1961, pp. 34-36.

"The Military Problem: I. Choosing Our Weapons," The New Republic, August 7, 1961, pp. 17-20.

A Proposal for a Ban on the Use of Nuclear Weapons, Washington, D. C.: Special Studies Group, Institute for Defense Analyses (Study Memorandum No. 4) October 6, 1961.

"Arms Control: What Is It? What Can It Do?" Vital Issues XI (No. 4) (December 1, 1961).

"Meaning of the Arms Control," The National Defense (Tokyo) X (February 1962) 12-16 (In Japanese).

"Civil Defense and Fallout Shelters," "The New Republic" February 26, 1962, pp. 13-15.

Arms Control and Inadvertent General War, Washington D. C.: Special Studies Group, Institute for Defense Analyses (Study Memorandum No. 6) 1962.

Limited War: An Essay on the Development of the Theory

-7-

and an Annotated Bibliography, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard Center for International Affairs (Occasional Papers No. 3) 1962.

Keffy:

"Comedy in a Humourless Time," New Values (Dacca Pakistan), Fall 1961, pp. 28-39.

"Whether Bound the Cold War?" (a symposium with three others), in the National Defense (Tokyo), January 1962, pp.30-46.

"Officers, Politics, Ideology," in Army, January 1962, pp. 30-33.

"Subverters of France: How the Secret Army Operates," in The New Republic, February 19, 1962, pp.12-16.

"An Interpretation of the Military Role of Japan," The National Defense (Tokyo), April 1962, pp1 12-21.

"Five Books on Guerrilla Warfare," review in Political Science Quarterly, June 1962.

"Prospects for an Algerian Algeria," in Orbis, Summer 1962, pp.311-324.

"Footnotes on Revolutionary War," in Military Review, pp.31-39.

FREDERIC A. MOSHER
Executive Assistant

February 20, 1963

Mr. Don K. Price, Dean
Graduate School of Public
Administration
Harvard University
Littauer Center
Cambridge 38, Massachusetts

Dear Mr. Price:

Thank you very much for sending us
the report on the expenditures under our
grant for support of the Defense Policy
Seminar. I assure you that the adjust-
ment you mention connected with charging
certain salaries and wages to other funds
is perfectly acceptable to us.

Sincerely yours,

FM:hh

COPY

cc: Prot. Klaasinger

Dean
Don K. Price

Yours sincerely,

during the academic year 1964-65.

Your willingness to leave this balance at our disposal

I appreciate, as I am sure Mr. Klaasinger does,

about the balance in the Defense Policy Seminar Grant.

I am very grateful to have your letter of May 26

Dear Mr. Moher:

New York 11, New York
280 Fifth Avenue.
Carnegie Corporation of New York
Mr. Frederic V. Moher

May 29, 1964

GRADUATE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
HARVARD UNIVERSITY

OFFICE OF THE DEAN

LITTAUER CENTER
CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS 02138

June 16, 1964

Dear Henry:

Enclosed is one of our standard budget allotment forms.

I would be much obliged if you would fill this out with estimates of the approximate breakdown of the various expense categories.

The funds available are approximately $6,000 remaining from the original Carnegie grant (3388-2), the exact amount of which of course remains to be determined, plus $3,000 of unrestricted funds (0001-1).

The detailed estimates are of course not binding; you will be free to make transfers as circumstances require.

If you could let me have this back not later than June 22, I would be very grateful.

DKP:B
Enclosure

REPORT OF DEFENSE POLICY SEMINAR

1959--1964

(2) To encourage faculty participation in the study of national security policy.

## Quality of the Student Body

In the past five years a major reconstruction of the Defense Policy Seminar has taken place. Part of this change becomes apparent from the breakdown of participants which is attached. In 1951, the Seminar included seventeen participants from the Harvard Business School, all but four of whom were professional officers at Harvard for a special course in logistics. Starting in 1960, the Seminar has admitted only military personnel who are of the caliber usually attending one of the war colleges or engaged in especially responsible academic work, such as teaching at the military academies. At the same time, standards for other students have been substantially raised. For example, no Law School student with less than a B average is considered. Despite these increasingly high standards, both applications and enrollment have substantially increased. The number of participants from the Harvard Business School and the Law School has dropped (though not Law School applications) and that from the Graduate

has dropped (though not law school applications) and that from the Graduate
The number of participants from the Harvard Business School and the Law School
high standards, both applications and enrollment have substantially increased.
with less than a B average is considered. Despite these increasingly
have been substantially raised. For example, no law school student
the military academies. At the same time, standards for other students
or engaged in especially reasonable academic work, such as teaching at
personnel who are of the caliper usually attending one of the war colleges
coarse in logistics. Starting in 1960, the Seminar has admitted only military
all but four of whom were professional officers at Harvard for a special
the Seminar included seventeen participants from the Harvard Business School,
from the breakdown of participants which is attached. In 1961,
Policy Seminar has taken place. Part of this change becomes apparent
In the best five years a major reconstruction of the Defense

Quality of the Student Body

Studies Program.

(3) To encourage research by the participants in the Defense
national security policy.

(2) To encourage faculty participation in the study of
research or in actual operation.
enter into various fields related to national security, either in
Graduate Schools during their formative years and to inspire them to

1963--1964

- 2 -

School of Public Administration and the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences
has increased as indicated.

<table><thead><tr><th>School</th><th>1959-60</th><th>1960-61</th><th>1961-62</th><th>1962-63</th><th>1963-64</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Law School</td><td>20</td><td>27</td><td>25</td><td>22</td><td>15*</td></tr><tr><td>Business School</td><td>17</td><td>6</td><td>4</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>GSPA</td><td>9</td><td>6</td><td>16</td><td>16</td><td>12</td></tr><tr><td>GSAS</td><td>3</td><td>1</td><td>8</td><td>12</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>College</td><td>2</td><td>2</td><td>8</td><td>3</td><td>3</td></tr></tbody></table>

* This reflects a limitation by the faculty. Many more students applied.

## Program

A number of modifications have taken place in the Seminar in the past five years.

(1) In five years there has been a sharp increase in familiarity with security issues within the academic community and a commensurate multiplication of books and articles. Thus the staff is no longer preoccupied with the preparation of special materials, but can choose from the soundest and most influential work in print.

(2) Each year we are able to register better qualified students who need less preliminary instruction in the field and are more fully prepared for the investigation and discussion of specific policy or theoretical issues. Our speakers in the full seminar meetings are alerted to expecting a high level of discussion, and our emphasis in the smaller section seminar (see ahead) has been shifting to meet more specialized and advanced needs. The programming of the Spring Term reflects especially our concern with special issues that are most critical at a given time. The Spring Term this year will focus on NATO and Viet-Nam.

on NATO and Airlift-Nam.

that are most critical at a given time. The Spring Term this year will focus programming of the Spring Term reflects especially our concern with academic issues ahead) has been shifting to meet more specialized and advanced needs. The high level of discussion, and our emphasis in the smaller section seminar (see issues). Our speakers in the full seminar meetings are invited to expecting a prepared for the investigation and discussion of specific policy or theoretical who need less preliminary instruction in the field and are more quickly

(2) Each year we are able to register better qualified students and meet influential work in print.

with the preparation of special materials, put can choose from the combat multiplication of books and articles. Time the staff is no longer preoccupied with security issues within the academic community and a commensurate

(1) In five years there has been a sharp increase in popularity best five years.

A number of modifications have taken place in the Seminar in the Program

of research materials.

Improvement in personnel, partly because of the more general availability

* This reflects a limitation by the faculty. Many more students attend.

<table><thead><tr><th>School</th><th>1952-53</th><th>1953-54</th><th>1954-55</th><th>1955-56</th><th>1956-57</th><th>1957-58</th><th>1958-59</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>College</td><td>3</td><td>2</td><td>8</td><td>3</td><td>3</td><td>3</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>G2V2</td><td>3</td><td>1</td><td>8</td><td>13</td><td>3</td><td>3</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>G2VA</td><td>3</td><td>6</td><td>10</td><td>10</td><td>15</td><td>15</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>Business School</td><td>11</td><td>9</td><td>4</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>Law School</td><td>30</td><td>31</td><td>32</td><td>33</td><td>33</td><td>12*</td><td>12*</td></tr></tbody></table>

has increased as indicated.

- 3 -

[Y]

(3) There has been as suggested, a trend toward greater course decentralization, with stress on teaching in smaller groups and a higher number of individual conference hours recorded. We would judge that this has implicated the student more closely--and professionally--in his work and increased the labor load of the assistants.

(4) Applications for admission to the Defense Policy Seminar peaked three years ago (undoubtedly under the stimulus of the Harvard-Washington connection) and have now apparently levelled off to a plateau which we regard as encouraging and yet manageable. In part this has been due to a logical equilibration of interest in the field following abrupt earlier growth. There is also general awareness among the students that Defense Policy is a highly demanding course and that our standards for admission are being constantly pushed up. We regard a class of 45-55 as optimum under present arrangements (regardless of the number of applicants) and we will accept only those students with a proven capacity to puruse the work with distinction. Judgements concerning admission are made by assessment of the quite comprehensive application forms which students must submit.

(5) There has simultaneously been a gradual but significant reapportionment of the students in terms of their graduate or professional field. As previous reports have stated, this shift has been somewhat away from the earlier Law School predominance (by means of more rigorous screening, since the applications tend to remain constant) and especially away from Business School applicants. A much higher proportion of our students are now Ph.D. candidates in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences (many of whom will presumably go on to teach defense policy in other institutions) or

will presumably go on to teach defense briefly in other institutions) or
Ph.D. candidates in the Graduate School of Arts and Science (many of whom
Business School applicants. A much higher proportion of our students are now
since the applications tend to remain constant) and especially away from
from the earlier law school predominance (by means of more rigorous screening,
field). As previous reports have stated, this shift has been somewhat away
reabandonment of the students in terms of their graduates or professional
(2) There has been simultaneously been a gradual but significant
of the quite comprehensive application forms which students must submit.
distinction. Judgements concerning admission are made by assessment
accept only those students with a proven capacity to burn out the work with
present arrangements (regardless of the number of applicants) and we will
being constantly bused up. We regard a class of 42-22 as optimum under
policy is a highly demanding course and that our standards for admission are
growth. There is also general awareness among the students that Defense
equipment of interest in the field following a sprout earlier
as encouraging andjetmanageable. In part this has been due to a logical
connection) and have now abratically levelled off to a plateau which we regard
two years ago (undoubtedly under the stimulus of the Harvard-Washington

(4) Applications for admission to the Defense Policy Seminar have
and increased the labor load of the assistants.
has indicated the student more closely--and professionally--in his work
number of individual conference hours recorded. We would judge that this
decentralization, with stress on teaching in smaller groups and a higher
(3) There has been as suggested, a trend toward greater cohesiveness

- 3 -

candidates for the M.P.A. degree in the School of Public Administration.

Gifted undergraduates are occasionally admitted. In terms of intellectual level and of fulfillment of purpose, we regard our present arrangement as a healthy and desirable improvement. We feel that we are now in a position to cultivate our teaching resources to the maximum and anticipate no major alterations in this regard.

Our attached enrollment tables will illustrate these observations.

Our meetings are, of course, enriched by the attendance of a variety of regular auditors possessing special competences in the security policy field.

Staff personnel has undergone several changes from the past year. Dr. Morton Halperin has returned after a year's leave of absence, and George Quester and Donald Shoup have joined the staff replacing Douglas Bailey, Leslie Gelb and George Kelly.

We repeat below our description of the course which was handed out to the students in the fall of 1964:

The Defense Policy Seminar deals with strategy and policy-making for United States national security. A central theme of the Seminar is the relationship of force and foreign policy in an age of accelerating technology and revolutionary developments in military science and world politics. In the fall term special emphasis is given at the outset to the broader perspectives of the international system, followed by specific detailed examination of the concurrent demands of strategy and organization in the United States defense establishment. The policy process with relation to its history and evolution and the involvement of the various interested agencies is studied. In the spring term, various specific topics of strategic concern are treated, such as: NATO, local war, general war doctrine, and arms control.

doctrine, and arms control.

strategic concerns are treated, and as : NATO, local war, General war agencies is studied. In the spring term, various specific topics of to its history and evolution and the involvement of the various interested United States defense establishment. The policy process with relation examination of the concurrent demands of strategy and organization in the perspectives of the international system, followed by a specific detailed full term special emphasis is given at the outset to the broader

and revolutionarily developments in military science and world politics. In the relationship of force and foreign policy in an age of accelerating technology United States national security. A central theme of the Seminar is the The Defense Policy Seminar deals with strategy and policy-making for to the students in the fall of 1964:

We repeat below our description of the course which was handed out and George Kelly.

and Donald Shond have joined the staff replacing Douglas Bailey, Elsie Celp Morton Halbertin has returned after a year's leave of absence, and George Quester Staff personnel has undergone several changes from the best year. Dr.

regular auditors beseasring special competences in the security policy field. Our meetings are, of course, enriched by the attendance of a variety of

Our attached enrollment table will illustrate these observations.

to cultivate our teaching resources to the maximum and anticipate no a healthy and desirable improvement. We feel that we are now in a position level and of fulfilment of purposes, we regard our present arrangement as Cited undergraduates are occasionally admitted. In terms of intellectual candidates for the M.B.A. degree in the School of Public Administration.

- 4 -

[N]

- 5 -

About half of the main Seminar meetings are conducted by Professors Kissinger and Halperin, and the remaining half are under the guidance of distinguished government and academic figures, who speak with candor and particular expertise. Among the Seminar guests scheduled for the fall of 1964 are: Raymond Cline, Deputy Director of CIA, Roswell Gilpatric, former Deputy Secretary of Defense, Alain Enthoven, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense, and General Andrew Goodpaster, Special Assistant to the Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff.

The weekly Seminars are supplemented by bi-weekly section seminar meetings, each dealing with one aspect of defense policy throughout the year. Each student is required to attend one of these groups. This year the section seminars are as follows:

**Section I: Mr. Donald Shoup, Strategic Doctrine and National Policy:**

A consideration of the theoretical origins and limitations of strategic doctrines, practical problems of application and implementation, and the relationship of various doctrines to national policy. The emphasis in section discussion is toward present problems of doctrine and policy and the effects of a series of time horizons upon them.

**Section II: Mr. Maury D. Feld, Decision Making and Strategic Choice:**

Discussion in this section concentrates on the relationship between the modes of decision-making employed by and the range of choice acceptable to a given armed force. Analysis focuses on the somewhat paradoxical relationship between rational planning for the most probable and the retention of flexibility in the event of the unforeseen.

relationship between rational planning for the most probable and the retention to a given armed force. Always focus on the somewhat paradoxical re-
the modes of decision-making employed by and the range of choice acceptable

Discussion in this section concentrates on the relationship between
Section II: Mr. Marry D. Reid, *Decision Making and Strategic Choice*;

in section discussion is toward present problems of doctrine and policy
and the relationship of various doctrines to national policy. The emphasis
strategic doctrines, practical problems of application and implementation.

Section I: Mr. Donald Shom, *Strategic Doctrine and National Policy*;

Year. Each student is required to attend one of these seminars. This year
meetings, each dealing with one aspect of defense policy throughout the

The weekly seminars are supplemented by bi-weekly section seminars
of Staff.

and General Andrew Coopbater, Special Assistant to the Chairman, Joint Chiefs
Secretary of Defense, Vlain Enthoven, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense,
Raymond Cline, Deputy Director of CIW, Roewell Cipacrine, former Deputy
expertise. Among the Seminar guests scheduled for the fall of 1964 are:
Government and academic figures, who speak with candor and barter their
Klaasiger and Halberin, and the remaining part are under the guidance of distinguished

About half of the main Seminar meetings are conducted by processors

- 2 -

[x]

Section III: Mr. George Quester, Current Strategic Alternatives:

This section deals with the interactions of contending states in
various modes of general war, limited wars, and arms control, stressing
modes of tacit and implicit communication between opponents. Analysis
focuses on the present strategic environment, but also draws on analogous
examples from the past.

The sub-groups double the effective course work for each student
as compared to their graduate seminar. Moreover, the students taking the
Seminar are the only ones in the graduate schools of Harvard who are
required to undertake both a major research paper and a final examination.

Research Activities

The Defense Policy Seminar does not sponsor research directly. However, its staff members are naturally drawn by the nature of their activities into research efforts, the results of which are almost invariably presented for discussion either to the full seminar or to its subgroups. During the academic year 1963-64 there were the following publications by members of the Defense Policy Seminar:

Henry A. Kissinger:

"Coalition Diplomacy in the Nuclear Age," *Foreign Affairs*, July, 1964.

Reprinted in *Survival, Le Monde, Frankfurter Allgemeine*, and the
*Atlantic Community Quarterly*.

"Reflections on Power and Diplomacy," *Dimensions in Diplomacy*,
John Hopkins Press, 1964.

"Les Etats-Unis et l'Europe," *Res Publica*, Revue de l'Institut Belge de Science Politique, Volume VI, 1964-I, p. 52-57.

"Classical Diplomacy," *Power & Order: Six Cases in World Politics*, Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc., 1964.

"Classical Diplomacy," in *Power & Order: Six Cases in World Politics*.

Belge de Science Politique, Volume VI, 1964-1, p. 25-27.

"Les Etats-Unis et l'Europe," *Revue de l'Etat*, Institut d'Etats-Unis et l'Europe, 1964.

"Reflections on Power and Diplomacy," in *Dimensions in Diplomacy*.

### *Viséan Community Quarterly.*

Reprinted in *Survival*, *Le Marge*, *Frankfurter Villenews*, and the "Coalition Diplomacy in the Unclear Age," *Foreign Affairs*, July, 1964.

### Henry V. Klaasen:

#### The Defense Policy Seminar:

academic year 1963-64 there were the following publications by members of discussion either to the full seminar or to its supranational. During the research efforts, the results of which are almost invariably presented for its staff members are naturally drawn by the nature of their activities into The Defense Policy Seminar does not sponsor research directly. However,

### Research Activities

required to undertake both a major research paper and a final examination. Seminar are the only ones in the Graduate schools of Harvard who are as compared to their Graduate seminar. Moreover, the students taking the The supranational couple the effective course work for each student examples from the best.

focuses on the present strategic environment, put also draws on analogies
modes of tact and implicit communication between opponents. Analyses
various modes of general war, limited war, and arms control, stressing
This section deals with the interactions of contending states in
Section III: Mr. George Queser, *Current Strategic Alternatives*:

- c -

Morton H. Halperin

"The Implications of the Test Ban Treaty and the U.S.-Soviet Attempts to Reach a Détente: An American View," *The Nucleus Deterrent in the Context of Anglo-American Relations*, Ditchley Papers No. 2 (Ditchley Park: The Ditchley Foundation, 1963), pp. 47-49.

"On Limited War," *War/Peace Report*, IV (March, 1964), 12-13.

"A Way to Stop the Spread of Nuclear Weapons," *War/Peace Report*, IV (August, 1964), 10-11.

*China and The Bomb*, Praeger, forthcoming (1965).

Maury D. Feld:

"Professionalism and the Military Journal," (prospective) in *Studies in Military Sociology*, Russell Sage Foundation (anticipated, 1964).

A list of all the publications of the Defense Policy Seminar staff since the beginning of the grant in 1960 is attached as Appendix.

## Other Results of the Seminar

1. At least ten graduates of the program are in responsible positions in the government, including one who is a Special Assistant to Assistant Secretary of Defense Paul H. Nitze.

2. The programs in defense policy of other universities are staffed by Defense Policy Seminar "alumni." Offshots of the program set up either with the assistance of the Defense Policy staff or using its materials are at UCLA, University of Wisconsin, Ohio State, University of California (Berkeley), Air Force Academy, United States Military Academy.

3. The Supplementary Bibliography of the Seminar, which is attached, is being used as the basis for similar programs at other universities.

4. The library of the Defense Studies Program maintains a clip file on defense issues. This is being used by students, faculty members, and members of defense industries and scientific laboratories located in the area.

membres of defense industries and scientific laboratories located in the area.

4) The library of the Defense Studies Program maintains a club file

3) The Subsidiary Bibliography of the Seminar, which is attached,
(Berkeley), Air Force Academy, United States Military Academy.

at NCU, University of Wisconsin, Ohio State, University of California
with the assistance of the Defense Policy staff or using its materials are
by Defense Policy Seminar "summit." Offshore of the program set up either
3) The programs in defense policy of other universities are staffed

Assistant Secretary of Defense Paul H. Nitse.

positions in the Government, including one who is a Special Assistant to

1) At least ten graduates of the program are in reasonable place

since the beginning of the Grant in 1960 is attached as Appendix.

A list of all the publications of the Defense Policy Seminar staff
"Professionalism and the Military Journal," (broadsheet) in *Studies in Military Sociology*, Russell Sage Foundation (encumbered '1964').

Maura D. Feld:

China and the Bomb, Prager, forthcoming (1962).

(August, 1964), 10-11.

"A Way to Stop the Spread of Nuclear Weapons," *War\Peace Report*, IV

"On Limited War," *War\Peace Report*, IV (March, 1964), 15-13.

Context of Anglo-American Relations, Ditchley Paper No. 2 (Ditchley to Reach a Défente: An American View), "The Nuclear Deterrent in the "The Implications of the Test Ban Treaty and the U.2.-Soviet Attents"

Morton H. Halperin

- 1 -

- 8 -

APPENDIX

Publications of the Defense Policy Staff

1960 - 1964

Kissinger: "Arms Control, Inspection and Surprise Attack," *Foreign Affairs*, July, 1960.

*The Necessity for Choice: Prospects of American Foreign Policy*, Harper & Bros., January, 1961.

"Reflections on Cuba," *Reporter*, November, 1962.

"The Unsolved Problems of European Defense," *Foreign Affairs*, July, 1962.

"L'evolution de la doctrine strategique aux Etats-Unis," *Politique Etrangere*, No. 2, 1962.

"Strains on the Alliance," *Foreign Affairs*, January 1963.

"The Skybolt Affair," *The Reporter*, January 17, 1963.

"Nato's Nuclear Dilemma," *The Reporter*, March 28, 1963.

Reprinted in *Survival*, *Le Monde*, *Frankfurter Allgemeine*, and *The Atlantic Community Quarterly*

"Reflections on Power and Diplomacy," *Dimensions in Diplomacy*, Johns Hopkins Press, 1964.

Harcourt, Bruce & World, Inc., 1964.
"Classical Diplomacy," Power & Order: Six Cases in World Politics,

Beige de Science Politique, Aujus AI, 1964-1, p. 25-27.

"Les Etats-Unis et l'Europe," Rea Pubs., Revue de l'Institut

Johns Hopkins Press, 1964.

"Reflections on Power and Diplomacy," Dimensions in Diplomacy,

Reprinted in Survival, Le Mond, Frankfurter Viigsgesetze, and The
July, 1964.

"Cooperation Diplomacy in the Nuclear War," Foreign Affairs,

"Nato's Nuclear Dilemma," The Reporter, March 28, 1963.

"The Skypolt Affair," The Reporter, January 13, 1963.

"Strains on the Alliance," Foreign Affairs, January 1963.

Politique Etrangère, No. 2, 1963.

"The evolution of the doctrine of strategic annihilation," Annua-Annua,

July, 1963.

"The Unresolved Problems of European Defense," Foreign Affairs,

"Reflections on Taxes," Reporter, November, 1963.

"For an Atlantic Confederacy," The Reporter, February 3, 1967.

Policy, Harber & Bros., January, 1967.

The Necessity for Choices: Prospects of American Foreign

"The Next Summit Meeting," Harber's, December, 1960.

"The New Critic of Neutrality," The Reporter, November 34, 1960.

Desgains, Fall, 1960.

"Limited War: Nuclear or Conventional? A Reassessment,"

Foreign Affairs, July, 1960.

Krausiger: "Arms Control, Inspection and Submarine Attack,"

1960 - 1964
B Publications of the Defense Policy Staff
APRILIX

- 8 -

[A]

- 9 -

[y]

Ransom: "Secret Mission in an Open Society," *New York Times Magazine*, May 21, 1961.

Halperin: (with Thomas C. Schelling) *Strategy and Arms Control* (New York: The Twentieth Century Fund, 1961).

Contributor to *Arms Control, Disarmament, and National Security* (New York: George Braziller Inc., 1961)

"The Military Problem: I. Choosing our Weapons," *The New Republic*, August 7, 1961, pp. 17-20.

"Defense on the New Frontier," *The New Republic*, October 2, 1961, pp. 34-36.

*A Proposal for a Ban on the Use of Nuclear Weapons*, Washington, D.C.: Special Studies Group, Institute for Defense Analyses (Study Memorandum No. 4) October 6, 1961.

"Arms Control: What Is It? What Can It Do?" *Vital Issues XXI* (No. 4) (December 1, 1961).

"Meaning of the Arms Control," *The National Defense* (Tokyo) X (February 1962) 12-16 (In Japanese).

"Civil Defense and Fallout Shelters," *The New Republic* February 26, 1962, pp. 13-15.

*Arms Control and Inadvertent General War*, Washington D.C.: Special Studies Group, Institute for Defense Analyses (Study Memorandum No. 6) 1962.

*Limited War: An Essay on the Development of the Theory and an Annotated Bibliography*, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard Center for International Affairs (Occasional Papers No. 3) 1962.

"Disarming the Disarmers," *The New Leader*, July 9, 1962.

"The 'No-Cities' Doctrine," *The New Republic*, October 8, 1962.

"The Limiting Process in the Korean War," *Political Science Quarterly*, March 1963.

"A Proposal for a Ban on the First Use of Nuclear Weapons," *Journal of Arms Control*, April 1963.

*Limited War in the Nuclear Age* (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1963).

"The Implications of the Test Ban Treaty and the U.S.-Soviet Attempts to Reach a Détente: An American View," *The Nuclear Deterrent in the Context of Anglo-American Relations*, Ditchley Papers No. 2 (Ditchley Park: The Ditchley Foundation, 1963), pp. 47-49.

Park: The Ditchley Foundation, 1963), db. 41-49.
Context of Anglo-American Relations, Ditchley Fabers No. 3 (Ditchley to Reach a Detente: An American View). The Nuclear Deterrent in the "The Implications of the Test Ban Treaty and the U.2.-Soviet Attempts Limited War in the Nuclear War" (New York: John Miley & Sons, 1963).

Tourney of Arme Control, Vbrf 1963.

"A Proposal for a Ban on the First Use of Nuclear Weapons," March 1963.

"The Limiting Process in the Korean War," Political Science Quarterly, March 1963.

"The 'Mo-Cities, Doctrine,' The New Republič, October 8, 1963.

"Disarming the Diarmera," The New Reader, July 9, 1963.

No. 3) 1963.
Harvard Center for International Affairs (Occasional Papers and an Annotated Bibliography, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Limited War: An Essay on the Development of the Theory

(Study Memorandum No. 6) 1963.

Special Studies Group, Institute for Defense Analysis

Arme Control and Inadvertent General War, Washington D.C.:

February 26, 1963, db. 13-12.

"Civill Defense and Rallent Shelters," The New Republič

(February 1963) 13-16 (in Japanes).

"Measuring of the Arme Control," The National Defense (Tokyo) X

(No. 4) (December 1, 1961).

"Arme Control: What Is It? What Can It Do?" Vittal Issues XXI

No. 4) October 6, 1961.

Special Studies Group, Institute for Defense Analysis (Study Memorandum V Proposal for a Ban on the Use of Nuclear Weapons, Washington, D.C.:

db. 34-36.

"Defense on the New Frontier," The New Republič, October 5, 1961.

August 3, 1961, db. 13-30.

"The Military Problem: I. Choosing our Weapons," The New Republič,

Security (New York: George Brasiller Inc., 1961)

Contributor to Arme Control, Disarmament, and National

The Twentieth Century Bund, 1961).

Herbert: (with Thomas C. Scheiling) Strategy and Arme Control (New York:

Kansom: "Secret Mission in an Open Society," New York Times Magazine, May 51, 1961.

- 3 -

[A]

- 10 -

Kelly: "The Political Background of the French A-Bomb," *Orbis*, Vol. 4, Fall, 1960.

"Comedy in a Humourless Time," *New Values* (Dacca Pakistan), Fall 1961, pp. 28-39.

"Whether Bound the Cold War?" (a symposium with three others), in *The National Defense* (Tokyo), January 1962, pp. 30-46.

"Officers, Politics, Ideology," in *Army*, January 1962, pp. 30-33.

"Subconverters of France: How the Secret Army Operates," in *The New Republic*, February 19, 1962, pp. 12-16.

"An Interpretation of the Military Role of Japan," *The National Defense* (Tokyo), April 1962, pp. 12-21.

"Five Books on Guerrilla Warfare," review in *Political Science Quarterly*, June 1962.

"Prospects for an Algerian Algeria," in *Orbis*, Summer 1962, pp. 311-324.

"Footnotes on Revolutionary War," in *Military Review*, pp. 31-39.

"Revolutionary War and Psychological Action," in Franklin Mark Osanka (ed), *Modern Guerrilla Warfare* (New York: The Free Press of Glenco, Ill., 1962), pp. 425-438.

"The Expert as Historical Actor," *Daedalus*, Summer 1963.

"The Expert as Historical Victor," *Designers*, Summer 1963.

Clenco, III, 1963), pp. 432-438.

Osuna (ed), *Modern Guerrilla Warfare* (New York: The Free Press of Revolutionary War and Psychological Action*, in Franklin Mark

"Bootnotes on Revolutionary War," in *Military Review*, pp. 31-39.

"Broadsides for an Victorian Virginia," in *Orbis*, Summer 1963, pp. 311-354.

Quarterly, June 1963.

"Five Books on Guerrilla Warfare," review in *Political Science*

The National Defense (Tokyo), April 1963, pp. 15-51.

"An Interpretation of the Military Role of Japan"

The New Redempic' (Prairia) 13, 1963, pp. 15-16.

"Supervisors of France: How the Secret Army Operates," in

"Officers' Politics' Ideology," in *Arm*, January 1963, pp. 30-33.

The National Defense (Tokyo), January 1963, pp. 30-40.

"Wither Bound the Cold War?" (a symposium with three others), in

Kii 1961, pp. 58-59.

"Comedy in a Humorous Time," *New Times* (Deccs Bardeen),

Vol. 41, January, 1961; also published in *Sakai*, May-June, 1961.

"Arms Control and the Military Ratsplaitment," *Military Review*,

Generals' (Prairia) 1961.

Vol. 40, October 1960; also published in *Romeo Military

Orbis, Vol. 4, Fall, 1960.

(anticipated 1964).

Studies in Military Sociology, Knueell Sige Konungtion

Volg: "Professionalism and the Military Journal," (broadsides) in

China and The Bomb, Braeser, forthcoming (1962).

(August, 1964), 10-11.

"A Way to Stop the Spread of Unclear Weapons," *War's Peace Report*, IV

"On Limited War," *War's Peace Report*, IV (March, 1964), 15-13.

- 10 -

November 5, 1964

Mr. John W. Gardner, President
Carnegie Corporation of New York
589 Fifth Avenue
New York, New York 10017

Dear John:

I am transmitting herewith a report prepared by Professor Henry A. Kissinger on the work of the Defense Policy Seminar in this School during the period 1959-1964.

I believe that you have already received from the Comptroller's Office of Harvard University a report on the expenditures under this program, which has been supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation, for the academic year ending June 30, 1964.

In addition to having the pleasure of an annual lecture to the Defense Policy Seminar, my old interests as a government official have led me to keep rather more closely in touch with this particular program than with most other activities within the Graduate School of Public Administration. I think it has been a conspicuous success, and that its usefulness has extended far beyond this School, to other parts of Harvard University and to other universities as well.

I should like to repeat my expression of appreciation to the Carnegie Corporation for the generous support that has made this program possible.

DKP:B

Enclosure

COPY

COPY

Enclosure
DKB:P

Yours sincerely,

made this program possible.

to the Carnegie Corporation for the Generous support that has
I should like to repeat my expression of appreciation

for beyond this School, to other parts of Harvard University and

the Graduate School of Public Administration. I think it has

to the Defense Policy Seminar, my old interests as a Government

1964.
the Carnegie Corporation, for the academic year ending June 30,
three under this program, which has been supported by a grant from
Controller, an Office of Harvard University a report on the expendi-
tions that you have already received from the

Seminar in this School during the period 1929-1964.

Fessor Henry V. Klaasen on the work of the Defense Policy

I am transmitting herewith a report prepared by Pro-

Dear John:

New York, New York 10011
289 Fifth Avenue
Carnegie Corporation of New York
Mr. John W. Gardner, President

November 2, 1964

19 April 1965

Dean Franklin L. Ford
Faculty of Arts and Sciences
University Hall 5

Dear Franklin:

When we spoke some weeks ago you were good enough to suggest that I might apply for support of the National Security Policy Seminar from a Ford Foundation grant.

The National Security Policy Seminar is in a somewhat different position from other seminars at Harvard for the following reasons:

(1) Its enrollment has never been less than forty-five over the past five years. Therefore teaching it is really comparable to some lecture courses. Each student, in addition to the regular session of the Seminar, is required to participate in one smaller group taught by an assistant and specializing in a particular topic.

(2) Because the subject changes so rapidly, there is a need to bring to Harvard experts in the various aspects of it for meetings with the Seminar.

(3) Because the material is so scattered, special library services are needed.

As I may have told you, we are completely out of funds. On the other hand, our needs are so relatively small that it seems to me unwise to wear out my welcome at Foundations for the few thousand dollars that are involved.

I am attaching a budget of our requirements which indicates that a $6,600 contribution yearly from the Ford Foundation grant would meet our needs.

I am enclosing a copy of the last report to the Carnegie Corporation.

Best regards.

Henry V. Kissinger

Sincerely yours,

Best regards.

needs.
$6,600 contribution nearly from the Ford Foundation Grant would meet our
I am attaching a budget of our requirements which indicates that a
that are involved.
to wear out my welcome at Foundations for the few thousand dollars
other hand, our needs are so relatively small that it seems to me unlike
As I may have told you, we are completely out of funds. On the
are needed.

(3) Because the material is so scattered, special library services
the Seminar.

(2) Because the subject changes so rapidly, there is a need to
be an assistant and specializing in a particular topic.

the Seminar, is required to participate in one smaller group taught
lecture courses. Each student, in addition to the regular session of
best five years. Therefore teaching it is really comparable to some
(1) Its enrollment has never been less than forty-five over the
position from other seminars at Harvard for the following reasons:

The National Security Policy Seminar is in a somewhat different
a Ford Foundation Grant.

I might apply for support of the National Security Policy Seminar from
When we spoke some weeks ago you were good enough to suggest that

Dear Franklin:

University Hall 2
Faculty of Arts and Sciences
Dean Franklin F. Ford

19 April 1962