Dr. Henry A. Kissinger
Harvard University
Cambridge, Mass.

19 July 1961

Dear Henry!

You certainly will be surprised to hear from
someone in Oberammergau after the many years since you
left this place. Even so I stayed in some way in con-
tact with you through the frequent newspapers write-ups
which have mentioned you these last few years. It has
kept me up to date on your activities and given me an
insight into your views and thoughts. As a matter of fact
I have promoted your most recent work, whose contents
I consider a 'must' for everyone in the intelligence
field. My sincerest compliments !

I am still with the school and I believe that
within my own sphere I have been able to contribute my
share to the needs of our Forces in Europe. I am as secure
in my position as a generally fluctuating world can offer
security. My many years of experience have provided me with
a certain depth of knowledge, I believe, which I try to
impart to our students. When I write to you today about
a special development, rest assured that this is not
motivated by selfish reasons. I do realize that by writing
about this development to you, I am 'cutting channels' and
I trust in your discretion and diplomacy in handling the
following knowledge so as to prevent any repercussions that
might harm my confiding in you !

To be specific: The Oberammergau school has for
many years now been the intelligence training center for
Europe and more recently also for Middle East and African
regions. In addition to language training we have through
our Strategic Intelligence Section given multiple area
background courses on all vital areas of interest to this
command. We have been the only intelligence installation
doing this type of work over here, and have served the army,
navy, airforce as well as NATO countries with our briefings.

[L]

Among the standard courses which we have run, I can mention a special 15 week German course, including a considerable number of background hours and a One year 'Dual Area' course, teaching two languages (German and a Slavic language plus background). Also we have presented special symposiums on the Middle East and several dealing with cold war problems. These were mostly attended by staff officers from the European Command and also by members of missions in the countries concerned.

We have maintained a staff of 47 Non-US instructors and 10 Department of the Army Civilians to support this program.

One of our most important courses has been the I-13 course (the Dual Area one year course), which intended to give students a practical working knowledge of the base language, (German) and a target language (Russian, Czech, Hungarian, Polish or Serbo-Croation, plus the necessary background in sociological, economic, political and military factors. It included intensive interrogation practice and other specialized phases, all considered essential for the efficient functioning of our military personnel in the different areas of this command.

For the purpose of economy this entire program has suddenly been cut out. Thus our language training program has virtually come to an end, with the exception of the 15 week German course, which will continue for the time being.

Reportedly Monterey in California teaches the same languages. However, one must consider that the latter school does not include the essential and extensive background studies which we developed and also that our local wage native instructors can be maintained at a very much lower salary scale than is prevalent in the U.S.. In addition we have had the advantage of flexibility, keeping close contact with the using units, and adjusting our teaching to their immediate requirements.

If one considers that there is a distinct shortage of qualified language instructors and qualified language trained military personnel, one wonders about the wisdom of all this. I recall that President Kennedy has frequently expressed his ideas about the need of trained linguists. Yet it seems that notwithstanding the shortage the program of acquiring such people is herewith materially reduced.

[L]

In view of the fact that so many extra millions are voted nowadays for new international programs, such as the Peace Corps and Foreign Aid, it seems that the relative small sums of money involved in promoting our own military intelligence collection effort certainly deserves a more liberal treatment than it is getting at present.

Being in constant contact with a cross section of the military personnel in our intelligence effort, I am very much concerned about the obvious lack of sufficient numbers of trained personnel. Both in the field of languages and ideological training there seems to be rather a crying need for a redoubled effort.

We are now dismissing some 40 of the 47 Non-US employees. Once they are all gone, it will be extremely difficult to regroup a qualified staff and take up the program again. The US staff in this effort has provided advice, training aids and special courses for many NATO allies and their installations, such as the RAF and the Intelligence School in the Netherlands. Since 1946 this School has graduated some 18,000 students and presented Symposia on the Middle East to over 250 Key Commanders, to mention a few additional factors. It seems that one would think twice, before dismantling this capability.

I am sure that whoever is responsible for the decision to discontinue most of this has acted with the very best of intention. Yet it may well be that at the Highest echelon one is not aware of all the implications.

As a former colleague of yours I know your viewpoint regarding need for languages. So I wanted to impart this information to you. I would be very much interested in your viewpoint. Please consider the above information confidential and the result of my sincere concern. Should you see Dr. Kramer, please give him my best regards. When I visited Washington several years ago, he spoke very highly of you. Do you ever see Springer and the Elkans ?

My very best wishes to all of you. I trust that you will not mind having taken you into my confidence. I do feel that you may be of some assistance, which will serve the best interests of our combined effort.

J. A. LORDEN
OBERAMMERGAY
LEONARD HALL

John A. Lorden
Oberammergau
Prussmanstr.11

25. August 1961

Mr. Henry A. Kissinger
Harvard University
Center for International Affairs
Cambridge Mass.

Dear Henry:

First of all, let me express my pleasure
at having received your letter, and your interest in
the subject under discussion.

Permit me to keep you posted. Most of our
language instructors have received more job-offers than
they can accept. This clearly indicates the great and
urgent need for linguists. At present there are still
a number of instr. who would prefer to stay here, where
they have their homes.

User units and particularly 10th Spec. Forces
are quite upset about the development. 10th Spec. Forces
apparently have sent a letter to Higher Headquarters,
requesting that our facilities be maintained. By next
year they anticipate a need for several hundred men,
with some linguistic background. They would have sent
them through us. As far as we know, there has been no
reaction so far. The longer things are permitted to drift,
the more difficult it will be to re-institute the
language and background phases.

With the re-activation of so many reservists it would appear as mandatory, that our Combat Int. Courses should incorporate some subjects taught here: i.e. European Topogr., Pol. Survey on Germ. & Sat.etc., to give them an inkling. Unfortunately also this is not being considered. The result is, that as the few remaining orientation-type courses come to an end, American instructors, with years of experience, also find themselves looking for new positions.

All in all, when looking at the situation as it is at present, it appears incredible that this installation is being phased out.

Thank you again for having brought the subject to the attention of some people in Washington. I hope that they can spare some time from the excitement of the moment, and attempt to redress, what is happening here right now.

With all good wishes, and to know that you still recall us here, I send you my most sincere greetings

28. August 1961

Dear Henry;

I hope my recent letters are not too
much of a time burden on you. Feel free to dis-
regard this one in such case. It is to serve only
as a possible hint.

First: I enclose a clipping which I took from St.&Str.
When I read it, I could only ask, whether we
really learned a lesson from the Russians. Is
this to be an expression of our understanding
of the European mentality? Do we have nothing
more worthwhile to give than questionable
Hillbilly Music?

Second: Clipping No.1, Newsweek. This appears to me
the only type of conversation the Soviets might
understand. When will we have more of these
things and why do we talk about them before we
have quantities of them?

Third: Clipping No.2, Newsweek. This appears to be the
direction most acceptable to many of our military
personnel. For instance the only speech given by
a guest lecturer, not only to all of our students,
but also to our cadre in the Post Theater, was
presented by a gentleman by the name of Dr.
Draskowicz. I don't know whether this name rings
a bell, but it appears that he is a good friend
of Gen. Walker.

It seems that at this moment intelligence training at
this school is being downgraded and emphasis is given
to the development of a new school which apparently will
not utilize some of the talent that has been fostered
here over the last 15 years. I can not discuss this new

school because its title and scope of activities
is classified. But if you are permitted to have
access to this kind of information, you might be
able to ascertain more details at the Dept. of the
Army, where it appears to be under consideration
at the present time. I personally feel that the mission
of the school is vastly more important, in that it has
trained mil. people to perform important jobs in the
Int. Field on a down to earth basis. I am therefore
greatly disturbed to witness this decline in int. trng.,
at a time when there seems to be a greater need for it
than ever. There is no doubt that the many new men
coming to Europe will also trickle into the Int. Field.
What could have been better for them, than to have been
put up-to-date and oriented at this installation?

Dear Henry; Again I ask you for your discretion. I
would be most grateful if you were to destroy this note
as soon as you have read it.

All my best wishes to you.

Most sincerely and cordially

p.s. As an afterthought I want to present one example
of government operations which do not make any sense to
me.

For instance the government invests a large amount of
money, time and effort in training people linguistically
(for one year) at Monterey, Cal. Subsequently a consider-
able percentage of such people are placed in positions
where they do not use what they learned. On top of it
all the government then neglects or refuses to protect
its investment it made in training these people, by not
giving them a refresher course to keep them up to a
minimum standard.

This is exactly what happened at this installation. The
first thing during a recent economy drive was to cut out
the least expensive course, namely the three weeks' lang.
refresher course, thus letting the original investment
of one years' training go to pots.

WEAPONS: NEWSWEEK

21.[LC] 61.

# For the 'Peanut War'

Filtering into the Pentagon last week were encouraging reports from far-off Saigon that U.S.-supported Vietnamese troops were scoring small but significant victories against the Communist VietCong guerrillas. Although an official Pentagon spokesman would say only that "it is premature to talk about it," other military sources were downright enthusiastic about the gains being made in Vietnam. "We're really making hay for the first time in a hell of a long while," one veteran officer said confidently. "The Communists are really going to have their hands full in Vietnam—and the rest of Southeast Asia—from now on."

Major reason for the growing confidence among Pentagon insiders: New U.S. equipment (to go along with new combat tactics) especially designed for guerrilla warfare in Southeast Asia. As one official put it: "The important development is that we have decided for the first time to use some of our newest weapons and best equipment where there is an actual battlefield. This is where we are fighting the Communists and it is on this battlefield that we should make our best effort." Then he added: "We've got some wild ideas we're working on. Nothing is too fantastic for us."

Among the new weapons and equipment being shipped to, or designed for, Southeast Asia:

* A "microjet" rocket, a tiny projectile about an inch long, that can be easily fired from a plastic tube no bigger than a drinking straw. The needle-like nylon rocket has a range of several hundred yards, a velocity of 4,000 feet per second. The weapon, in effect, is a modern adaptation of blowgun darts, and by mounting a cluster of firing straws together, a Gatling-gun effect can be created. "It's almost a silent killer and it's the deadliest little weapon I've ever seen," says one guerrilla expert.

* Lightweight machine guns, readily handled by slightly built Southeast Asians. As one hard-bitten veteran puts it: "You've heard about the Laotians not firing their rifles because they're Budchists and they don't like to kill. That's

a lot of bunk, the real reason is that those little guys weigh 90 pounds sopping wet and when they fire a Garand the recoil could bust a collarbone. So they have to lower the stock and fire the rifle from the hip and you can't get much accuracy that way. What they need is the grease gun—something light and easy to fire."

* An explosive gas that could be released over the enemy. Hugging the ground, the gas is set off by any spark—in the same way that dust in a grain elevator sometimes ignites. "In a fraction of a second," says a researcher, "the stuff goes boom and it pulverizes everything in sight."

* Canadian-made de Havilland "Caribou" transport planes that can be effectively used from improvised airfields for close support of troops. The Caribou carry 24 paratroopers or 3 tons of cargo at speeds up to 200 mph or as slow as 70 mph. Vietnam is getting some of the first off the assembly line.

* Small boats for jungle river operations, advance radio communication equipment for reliable operation in the back country, night-vision devices for combat, and lightweight vehicles suitable for mountainous terrain.

The U.S. emphasis on furnishing the Vietnamese with weapons and tactics suited to local terrain and capabilities represents a "revolution" in Pentagon thinking, said one military source. "The real secret," he went on, "is the boldness of approach, and the determination to frustrate the Communists. We are really getting support from the top, including money. It may not sound very big in a $47 billion defense budget, but the total may run into tens of millions. And that's certainly not peanuts in what, after all, is a peanut-size war. But this is a peanut war we cannot afford to lose."

Howling Nor'easter: JFK...

Outflung north and east into the Atlantic Ocean from decorous Massachusetts like the saucy arm of a Puritan maid, Cape Cod offers a variety of wild beauty—seascape and dune, bog and pond—that swiftly transforms vacationer into suitor, fervent, jealous, and, above all, protective. So early a vacationer as Henry David Thoreau wrote ardently of Nauset Beach: "A man may stand there and put all America behind him." And then, jealous and protective, Thoreau expressed the devout hope that Cape Cod's charms would escape the notice of those who wanted "a tenpin alley" or "a circular railway" in their vacationlands.

Bowling alleys came to Cape Cod some years ago. So did drive-in movies, hamburger stands, miniature golf, motels, hair-of-the-doghouses, dance palaces, and, predictably, "The Leaning Tower for Pizza." Such gaudy innovations fair set on edge the teeth of Cape Cod's summer romantics, including one John Kennedy, a summertime resident of Hyannis Port on the Cape's south shore.

Mr. Kennedy, first as senator and later as President, was in a position to do something about it. He had the help, what's more, of Massachusetts Sens. Leverett Saltonstall and Benjamin Smith II as well as Rep. Hastings Keith, who steadily guided the bill through two years of hearings. Last week the President signed into law an act creating Cape Cod National Seashore.* Henceforward, 26,666 largely untouched acres of Cape Cod, in a narrow strip stretching from the elbow at Chatham to the artist-colony fingertip at Provincetown, will be

under the watchful duenna's eye of the National Park Service (map).

"This is a wise use of our natural resources," Mr. Kennedy said, "and I am sure that future generations will benefit greatly ..."

But many of his Cape Cod neighbors were not so sure—and some were violently opposed. NEWSWEEK'S White House correspondent Charles Roberts, taking time off from his normal coverage of the President at Hyannis Port for a look at the newest Federal park, talked with scores of residents last week. "To an inland who journeys up that scenic

Newsweek—Magill

*And not a national park. One difference: Parks often forbid hunting and fishing; both will be permitted on Cape Cod.

NEWSWEEK Aug. 21 61

WASHINGTON

Politics and the Brass

by Kenneth Crawford

JUST before he left the White House last January, President Eisenhower delivered a farewell television address warning against "the acquisition of unwarranted influence" by what he called "the military-industrial complex." He said a total of 3.5 million persons, in and out of uniform, were directly involved in the business of national defense. He added that the corporations supplying this complex spent in a year the equivalent of the net earnings of all American corporations.

"We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes," he said. "The potential for the rise of misplaced power exists and will persist."

What the outgoing President apparently had in mind was that a big peacetime officer corps, supported by a powerful segment of industry, might sometime become so influential as to dominate the civilian branches of government. Its lobbies already had been powerful enough to challenge his economy policies when applied to the Pentagon. And the Kennedy build-up since then has increased the pressure potential of this alliance.

MEN OF RESTRAINT

The Eisenhower warning might have been whispered down a well for all the impression it made. The nation was preoccupied with the Soviet and Red Chinese threats and it wanted defense. It was not disposed to worry about the long-range consequences of superimposing a big, and perhaps permanent, military establishment on its governmental system for the first time. Anyway, fear of civilian domination by the military seemed far-fetched. From George Washington through Eisenhower himself, our most admired military leaders have been men of breadth and restraint who believed firmly in the constitutional subordination of the armed services to civilian authority derived from the ballot. Never seriously challenged, this subordination now has the sanction of tradition as well as law.

Any notion that extremist American generals or admirals would ever, in any circumstances, try to unseat elected officials in emulation of the French ultras in Algeria would be

considered ridiculous in this country. Yet more than a few retired officers, free to speak their minds at last, publicly proclaim their scorn of every Administration elected by the American people since 1928, including, and especially, the present one. And the military services have been sponsoring forums for the indoctrination of civilians on "the issues of the cold war" in which speakers have accused these Administrations of managing the domestic and foreign affairs of the nation "for the benefit of" the Communists.

BIRCHITE METHOD

The wildest of these speakers have usually been retired officers and civilians rather than active officers, but not always. Borrowing the syllogistic method of the John Birch Society and its kind, they have declared the welfare state socialistic, equated socialism with Communism, and concluded that all three are about the same thing. Sen. Strom Thurmond has defended this process of reasoning on the floor of the Senate and attacked Sen. William Fulbright for challenging its validity and the propriety of its use at seminars conducted under the egis of the military. Rep. Dale Alford of Arkansas, agreeing with Thurmond, has all but announced that he will make this his issue in a bid for Fulbright's Senate seat next year.

Secretary McNamara has taken the not unreasonable position that the services shouldn't lend their presence and prestige to oratorical exercises in which the broadly implied message is that the Commander in Chief is Communism's best friend. But the President was at pains at his last press conference to deny that the brass was being silenced. While he must recognize that military careerists tend to stand far to the right, he thinks that members of the present high command are professionals who can eschew politics. He appears confident, moreover, that most members of the officer corps are not what Fulbright calls "radicals of the right." The President likes to believe that the forums were not so much reflections of Pentagon opinion as consequences of carelessness about arrangements and speakers. Fulbright can be excused if he takes a less philosophic view.

20

26. Oct. 1961

Dear Henry;

It is the purpose of this letter to keep you informed. Our language instructors have left, with the exception of 8 Germans, and we too have received our RIF notices.

I discussed the end of our program with one of our very conscientious officers, and he, like so many others, stated, that whoever decided on the termination of the Int. & Lang.Sch., deserves a medal. The question is only, from which side?

There is no question as to the importance of language instruction. Eastern publications remind us continuously of the emphasis given to that skill in their orbit. There, three years are frequently devoted and considered a normal period to gain fluency. We do it in 6 months or one year. Too short indeed, but better than no training at all.

The reasons given for discontinuing our school are:

1. There is one language school in California.

2. Soldiers now coming to Europe should be ready to fight and should not have to attend schools.

Were hostilities to break out to-morrow, this viewpoint would be justified. In case of extended peace, this would be the opportunity for soldiers now reaching Europe to finish their studies or to start with new ones. It may be assumed that, as the number of men called to arms increases, existing military schools in the States will eventually be unable to keep up with the new influx. What then is the wisdom to discontinue this school with its excellent reputation?

10th Special Forces wanted to send their men. USAREUR failed to see this need. According to their judgement, these men should retain some 150-200 words. Stars and Stripes reported that Fort Bragg is more demanding in this respect; requiring for their men the astronomic figure of 7-800 words. I question whether either quantities will suffice to provide the soldier with the proper tools needed in the field?

After the RIF I contacted the S-3 of 10th Spec. Forces. I proposed two possible solutions. One was to present their request to EUCOM or SOTFE; the other, to start their own language training section. I would be most willing to organize it for them.

They reacted favorably, but I feel that all this will take
too much time and I shall be out of the theater or have a
new position before this can be crystallized, and our old
instructors, who were dismissed, can be rehired,

Permit me to talk about one more aspect related to languages.
As you know, many soldiers have had some training at ALS. As
a rule they fail to gain practice in what they learned. They
forget. One of our colonels suggested, that in order to keep
language capability alive, the army should reward an individual
with $50.- monthly. This, to stimulate his interest. I question
this idea. If our government spends so much money on an
individual to teach him languages, it should be natural for
each soldier to invest his own efforts to keep the language
alive. What we could and should do to maintain fluency is
to conduct 3-4 weeks refresher courses, as we had done it here,
in each theater. Attendance once a year should be mandatory
for all who have foreign language capability. Even foreign born
may need specialized vocabulary.

Dear Henry, please forgive me for having taken so much of
your time. From a national viewpoint I feel that the whole
question ought to be of interest to our army. From a personal
viewpoint I would like to continue doing something which I
consider essential. Your influence might be of great value.
Whether any possible action by you would come timely enough
to salvage anything is questionable. Still I feel it is worth
the effort. From here it is up to you.

Please excuse my poor typing and errors. I am not a good typist
and this too personal to be handled be a secretary.

I hope this letter reaches you in the best of health. All the
best to you and your family. Please give my regards to Dr.
Kraemer in case you see him.

November 10, 1961

Mr. John A. Lorden
Prussmanstrasse 11
Oberammergau, Germany

Dear John:

Many thanks for your letter of
October 26th. As I mentioned earlier, I am
glad to be kept informed and will try to do
whatever I can--though I should warn you that
this may not be much.

Kind regards.

December 8, 1961

Dear John:

Despite the fact that the conclusion
was not favorable, I thought you might like
to see the enclosed letter copy about the
Oberammergau School which was sent by the
Office of the Secretary of Defense. I am
sorry nothing could be done.

Kind regards, and all good wishes for
Christmas and the new year.