[LC]

29 November 1963

MEMORANDUM

From Edward G. Lansdale, Maj. Gen. USAF (Ret) Ed

Subject: "Liberty Hall"

Since my retirement from active service 1 November 1963, I have been facing the usual query: what are you going to do now? The warm friendship of a number of people has been expressed in offers and suggestions, mostly in terms of service to my fellow man -- which I like and may well do. Yet, none of them exactly fills some of the outstanding needs I noted in my years in the rough and tumble of U. S. national security work, needs which a man might act to fill in the freedom of retirement.

So, I've been reflecting on the subject and have come up with at least one specific idea so far. It is only a rough concept as yet, but has a strong appeal as something worth further development.

The concept is sketched in below, to permit a critical look at it by folks whose opinion I respect. Is this idea feasible, as something worth getting started in the next year or so? Is there a better way of doing this?

## Defining a Need

The world scene today has a curious aspect. The leading nation, a democracy, ours, is challenged by what our forefathers would call a tyranny. The tyranny employs its political beliefs as its basic means to overcome us, using diplomatic, psychological, economic, and military instruments to carry its political beliefs forward. Despite our fine words, in actual practice we often combat this tyranny by using our means in inverse order. In fact, with a few notable exceptions, we seem to be reluctant to use the greatest strength in our national heritage -- our political beliefs -- when we come up against this tyranny abroad. So, in too many instances, our political beliefs are not employed as a practical base for all our national security work in countries abroad -- as are the political beliefs of the tyranny.

If there is doubt about the correctness of this conclusion, which admittedly has been simplified to its bare bones, then pause and reflect about U.S. work in nations abroad where the confrontation is most critical. Single out country after country. If our work in each were put on a scale, to show the amount of U.S. thought, energies, skill, and material resources devoted to each means, wouldn't the amount devoted to forwarding our own political beliefs be miniscule -- in comparison to military aid, to economic aid, to diplomatic activities, to psychological purveying of news or sowing hatred and fear of the tyranny, or even to collecting information on the local situation to forward to Washington? The scale becomes plain when you count the noses of U.S. officials in a country abroad, by their assigned duties -- to staff conventional diplomacy, the economic aid mission, the military aid mission, and so on. Then, count the noses, if any, of U.S. officials assigned the duty of furthering U.S. political beliefs, in that country, for its people.

After years of being teamed up with many Americans in our national security work abroad, I conclude sadly that few of them seem to understand the dynamics of the American Revolution, either feeling that its political beliefs belong to a past century and not today's, or that our political beliefs are merely a replica of governmental organization which cannot or should not be transplanted abroad. Evidently that which is not understood is something which then is not used.

If there were a family of nations in the world, each fully committed to the freedom of the individual citizen, with each government responsive to the will of an informed popular electorate (such as the U.S. the U.K., Canada, Australia, and the Philippines, for example), there would be a sound basis for honorable international peace among them. If we looked upon each foreign nation, as a country to be developed gradually and constructively to a status where it could join rightfully such a family of nations, and made the changing of such a country's political potential into a reality as the basis for our true national security work in that country, then wouldn't we find our diplomatic, economic, psychological, and military activities more and more being used to implement our political beliefs abroad towards a practical and realizable world peace? I believe this is a true goal, well worth a hard start towards it.

2

[LC]

Concept of an Answer

In a nut-shell, the thought is to create an instrument for continuing the American Revolution today, abroad, through enlightenment. As a focus for thinking about it, I have dubbed this instrument "Liberty Hall."

There would be a small group of experienced people gathered together as a permanent staff, as well as equally hand-picked associates at home and abroad. Its physical locus would be a center with offices and class rooms, probably in the area of Washington, D. C. Perhaps its best form would be as a public subscription, non-profit, public-service corpora-
tion.

Liberty Hall would teach practical American political action, for export abroad. Also, it would provide the means for giving realistic advice on political problems in critical areas abroad. Essentially, its work would be to help create strengths in the Jefferson and Lincoln tradition to oppose and defeat tyranny, such as international Communism, wherever it exists. As a practical matter, the start probably would be with national problems in threatened non-Communist countries.

**Instruction.** The concept envisions that each course would examine the fundamental elements which make a democracy viable, the fundamental elements of opposing tyranny, and then analyze the specific situation in a selected foreign country to determine the identity and growth of those same elements in the selected country. There would be a final working seminar to explore ways and means, acceptable to the people of the selected country, for encouraging the growth and strengthening of democratic elements, while weakening and defeating the elements of tyranny. The course would strive to prepare the students to be successful "Saturday afternoon quarterbacks" in the selected country, in contrast to the "Monday morning quarterbacks" prepared by most U.S. academic courses.

**Students.** Initially, the students should be a carefully picked handful of U.S. official personnel, primarily from the Foreign Service, being assigned to duties in the selected country, both in the country and at Washington desks. Later, equally hand-picked students from the selected country would be included in subsequent classes. Eventually, picked third-country nationals could be included.

3

[LC]

**Advising.** The concept also envisions that the Liberty Hall staff will be available as advisors. This is seen as acting as consultants to the U.S. government as well as to foreign governments or to significant democratic elements in foreign countries, by invitation, on how best to help strengthen the democratic growth of selected countries. This requires an exceptionally high-calibre staff, a deep understanding of the situation in the country involved, practical political acumen expressed in specific do-able terms, and warm empathy for those officials grappling with the problems "on the firing line."

How does a Chief Executive resolve schisms in his own party or best work with the Legislative branch? How should a loyal opposition be constructed out of sharply critical non-Communist elements in a country threatened internally by Communist action? How does one ensure the sanctity of the ballot, given local practices to control results illegally? How best can expressions of popular will be expressed in newly independent nations, in building popular institutions? These, and similar questions, have begged for mature practical solutions in a number of countries since the end of World War II.

**Staff.** There are a number of Americans who have been in the midst of the struggle between our great democracy and the opposing tyranny, who are now retired from active official duties, but who also are devoted enough to the high purposes of our democracy to continue serving them willingly if given a worth-while way of doing so. Among these Americans are experienced former ambassadors and Foreign Service officials, former members of Congress, Intelligence officers, and others from both the Executive Branch and private life. Some, perhaps, would be willing to serve full-time as the staff for Liberty Hall. Some, perhaps, would be willing to be on-call as consultants on specific types of problems and on specific countries or geographic regions. The thought is that a staff of truly mature, trusted, and practical people could be gathered to perform this unusually significant service to the cause of the United States, whose talents and imaginative skills might otherwise be dissipated in retirement from public service.

**Physical Plant.** The thought is to keep the physical plant modest and to locate it in or near Washington. Perhaps it should be a house in Washington itself or perhaps in a farm or retreat in the nearby countryside. There should be offices for the staff, rooms in which to hold small classes, and space for a working library.

4

**Financing.** The initial thought is that Liberty Hall would be established as a public service type of corporation, supported by popular subscription. It would be ideal if fiscal support could be spread widely enough among donors to ensure the independence of the organization in pursuit of its high aims. Also, it is possible that fees for advisory services would assist, particularly in their visits to foreign countries.

**Team Work.** There are a number of U.S. and foreign public service type of organizations and foundations devoted to various aspects of man's freedom or to the problems of specific areas of the world. It might be of distinct service to the common cause if Liberty Hall were to form working bonds with these organizations, somewhat along the lines of the Committees of Correspondence during the American Revolution.

* * * * *

That, then, is the rough concept. Is this idea feasible, as something worth getting started in the next year or so? Is there a better way of doing this?

5