and the Soviet Union. If the Soviet Union should but achieve
significant technical-military superiority over the U.S., it
would exploit this advantage either politically or militarily.

6. The U.S., for a variety of reasons, has not been able to exploit its nuclear advantage politically. Consequently, if it should lose its nuclear advantage, its world position would deteriorate. For this negative reason alone, the U.S. should seek to maintain superiority. President Johnson declared in a speech at St. Louis, on October 21, 1964, that the policy of the U.S. was "maintaining superiority in every field of science and technology which does or can affect defense."

If the trend toward independent national policies persists, superiority alone will give the U.S. maximum freedom of action.

7. Superiority alone, however, will not resolve the conflict.

The U.S. must wed that superiority to a grand political strategy designed to insure that this "small planet" is ultimately organized along lines compatible with our values. This requires:

a. Maximum exploitation of technology to anticipate and dampen conflict.

b. A more successful Western ideological offensive.

8. Technological Exploitation - The U.S. must maintain its strategic superiority in order to retain its world position. In addition to its defensive posture new surveillance techniques need to be

exploited both to maintain the peace and to advance a political
program. Activities which are potentially dangerous must be
monitored and the great mass of data assembled by sensing devices
must be rapidly communicated, processed, and evaluated. Sensitive
instruments must be made available that can visually and elec-
tronically detect evidences of hostile intent. Not only must
operations such as troop movements, missile launchings, and
nuclear blasts be detected, but also space and undersea activities
must be monitored. This will require sensing devices in rivers
and oceans, and radar, optical, and infrared type ground and
satellite-based systems.

Rapid communications systems such as improved satellite
repeaters will be able to relay information from the multitude
of sensing devices to centralized processing elements where
evaluation and interpretation can be made and advanced memory
systems can be used to keep pace with developing situations.
Communication satellites can be used to open up closed societies.

The above systems should be politically and economically
feasible. By implementing these surveillance systems the U.S.
can be warned not only against impending attack but also against
any hostile buildup that might lead to an attack. By these
means the U.S. should be able to anticipate and dampen conflicts.

- 5 -

9. Ideological Manipulation - In the years since the death of Stalin there has emerged in the Soviet Union and in certain European parties a "reformist element" which appears to be strongly opposed to the doctrine of revolution by nuclear war. The faction which opposes this group is the radical adventuristic faction which advocates world revolution even though it be purchased at the risk of nuclear war. Between these two groups stands the party leadership steering a middle course - a course which has become less and less tenable.

It is in the interest of the United States to take sides in this ideological dialectic. How can the hand of the reformists be strengthened, how can the wind be taken out of the radicalist sails, and how can those in the middle be persuaded to close ranks with the reformists against the radicals?

All things being equal, it redounds more to the benefit of the United States to have the reformists in power rather than the radicals. Although both groups maintain the commitment to ultimate world communism, it is better to deal with the "co-existentialists" than with the "war-hawks." The ability of the United States to manipulate communist means may, in fact, ultimately influence their ends. Obviously, reformists will be deterred far more easily than radicals. Therefore, if the task of the United States is to deter a radical rather than a reformist

- 6 -

Kremlin, the comparative superiority of this nation must never
be in doubt.

There is a significant "feed-back" involved here:
a substantial Western superiority might strengthen the hands
of the reformist, whereas a "balance of terror" (i.e., the
unwillingness of the West to maintain superiority) might help
the radicals.

The contrary feed-back might also occur whereby substantial
Western superiority may provide the radicals with an argument
for augmented Soviet force levels. Yet, it would be difficult
for the Soviet Union to win an arms race in which the United
States would be running in earnest. It, therefore, appears
likely that sustained Western superiority would prove the
futility of the radical and adventurous course of action and
would facilitate a reformist ascendancy in the USSR. Continued
U.S. superiority is the sine qua non of Soviet reform and provides
the reformists with a fulcrum with which to unseat the militant
faction. In sum, U.S. superiority and an adroit ideological
offensive provide the one possibility of winning without war.

January 4, 1965

Mr. William R. Kintner
Deputy Director
University of Pennsylvania
Foreign Policy Research Institute
Room 102-1B3 South 36th Street
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104

Dear Bill:

At last I have read your outline of Chapter 18 and I
am afraid that I must disappoint you again because I have
practically no comments.

The second sentence of Paragraph 6, while correct
does not seem to follow logically from the preceding one.
Also on page 5 you are making a point which I have made
myself with a rather bad conscience, namely that it is in
our interest to back the "reformists" in the Soviet Union
against the war party.

First of all I do not know what the so-called radicals
would do that the others are not doing.

Secondly, I think that the so-called "reformists" may
be harder to deal with.

Thirdly, if our technological superiority persists,
the radicals should have no incentives to be aggressive. If
it does not, even the "moderates" will be bellicose.

Fourthly, is it really true that Stalin was so aggressive
compared to his successors?

I have used the same arguments which proves that our
environment is very powerful.

Warm regards.

Henry V. Kiebler

Sincerely yours,

Warm regards.

Environment is very powerful.

I have used the same arguments which prove that our
compared to his ancestors?

Fortuitously, is it really true that Stalin was so aggressive
compared to his ancestors?

It does not, even the "moderates" will be pelicans.

The radicals should have no incentives to be aggressive.

Thirdly, if our technological superiority beats us,
the radicals should have no incentives to be aggressive.

be harder to deal with.

Secondly, I think that the so-called "reformists" may
would do that the others are not doing.

First of all I do not know what the so-called radicals
against the war bark.

our interest to pack the "reformists" in the Soviet Union
myself with a rather bad conscience, namely that it is in
also on page 2 you are making a point which I have made
does not seem to follow logically from the preceding one.

The second sentence of Paragraph 2, while correct
practically no comments.

am afraid that I must disappoint you again because I have
At last I have read your outline of Chapter 18 and I
against the war bark.

Dear Bill:

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104
Room 103-103 South 36th Street
Foreign Policy Research Institute
University at Pennsylvania
Deputy Director
Mr. William R. Kiebler

January 4, 1962

UNIVERSITY of PENNSYLVANIA

FOREIGN POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE

Room 102 - 133 South 36th Street

PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA 19104

EVERGREEN 2-0685

ROBERT STRAUSZ-HUPE, Director

January 5, 1965

Dr. Henry A. Kissinger
Center for International Affairs
6 Divinity Avenue
Cambridge 38, Massachusetts

Dear Henry:

Thanks for your letter and comments concerning the
difficulty of choosing between Soviet "reformists" and Soviet
"radicals."

Today, while reading the December issue of the *Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists*, I came across the statement summarizing the discussions at the Pugwash XIII Conference "released by the International Pugwash Continuing Committee in London."

I note your name among the participants. The way the material is presented in the *Bulletin*, it could imply an endorsement of the summary. I trust that this was not your intention.

I hope that we will have a chance to get together and
review "The Brave New World."

With all good wishes,

WRK:mgt

UNIVERSITY of PENNSYLVANIA

EVERGREEN 2-0685

ROBERT STRAUSZ-HUPE, Director

January 8, 1965

Dr. Henry A. Kissinger
Center for International Affairs
6 Divinity Avenue
Cambridge 38, Mass.

Dear Henry:

For the past six months, we have been developing a
project for an examination of the role of **Elites and**
**International Integration** which we believe will be most
useful.

Recently we forwarded this proposal to the Rockefeller
Brothers Fund via a letter from the Provost, Dr. David R.
Goddard to Mr. Laurance S. Rockefeller, President. I hope
you will have a chance to look it over. I plan to call you
next week and see what suggestions you might make, if any,
as to a follow-up approach to the Rockefeller Brothers Fund.

With all good wishes,

WRK:mgt

Enclosures: copy of letter from Dr. Goddard
**Elites and International Integration** proposal

December 29, 1964

Dear Mr. Rockefeller:

Since its founding in 1955, the University's Foreign Policy Research Institute has had as one of its principal interests the study of political integration at the international level. In particular, several projects undertaken by the Institute have examined the problems of political integration in the North Atlantic area.

In September of 1957, the University of Pennsylvania co-sponsored with the College of Europe a conference on European and Atlantic unity, held in Bruges, Belgium. This meeting, organized under Institute supervision, brought together more than 100 leading Americans and Europeans with special competence to discuss the intellectual and cultural basis of community.

Among the proposals which issued from the Bruges Conference was the recommendation for the creation of an Atlantic Institute as a means for promoting scholarly and cultural exchange within the North Atlantic area and developing study programs addressed to political, economic and social topics of common Atlantic concern. The Atlantic Institute began its work in Paris in 1961 with the Honorable Henry Cabot Lodge as its first director.

The Foreign Policy Research Institute of the University of Pennsylvania now proposes to examine the relationship between elite groups and international integration within the Atlantic area. The proposal submitted herewith represents an effort to extend the horizons of our knowledge with respect to a critical problem confronting mankind today: how to build within given cultural areas political communities which are consonant with the technological, economic, and political changes which have occurred during the last generation. This study proposal would assess the role which elite groups have played, and may be expected to

Mr. Laurence S. Rockefeller

-2-

December 29, 1964

play, in the process of international integration. The Institute would undertake to collect data about the attitudes of elites which could be of immense value to scholars. Research such as that which the Institute proposes to conduct might produce a new body of knowledge not only about problems confronting the North Atlantic area, but also about the process of integration elsewhere at the international level. Its findings might provide useful data to policymakers engaged in the difficult task of formulating new United States strategies for the years ahead.

I am happy to submit this proposal to you with Dr. Harnwell's endorsement on behalf of the University in the hope that it will be found of interest and be accorded support.

Mr. Laurence S. Rockefeller
President
Rockefeller Brothers' Fund
30 Rockefeller Plaza
New York 20, New York

bcc: Mr. Tucker
Mr. Dodge
Dr. Strausz-Hupe
Mr. Herber, FPRI

January 20, 1965

Mr. William R. Kintner
Deputy Director
Foreign Policy Research Institute
University of Pennsylvania
133 South 36th Street, Room 102
Philadelphia 4, Pennsylvania

Dear Bill:

The parliamentary procedure at the
Pugwash Conference is unbelievable. There
is no possibility either for associating
or disassociating from the report, since
it is issued by the continuing committee.

This being the case, I have decided
not to attend another conference.

Kind regards.

Henry V. Klaasen

Sincerely yours,

Kind regards.

not to attend another conference.
This being the case, I have decided

it is issued by the continuing committee.
or disassociating from the report, since
it is no benefit to either for associating
Pugman Conference is unbeneficial. There
The parliamentary procedure at the

Dear Bill:

Philadelphia 4, Pennsylvania
133 South 36th Street, Room 103
University of Pennsylvania
Foreign Policy Research Institute
Deputy Director
Mr. William R. Knaus

January 30, 1962

Purpose

The Foreign Policy Research Institute of the University of Pennsyl-
vania was established in February 1955 for the following purposes:

To examine the fundamental, long-range problems of United States foreign policy, with special attention to three broad areas: (a) the international communist movement; (b) the Atlantic alliance; and (c) the revolution which is reshaping both the industrialized and the underdeveloped regions of the world.

To develop guidelines for United States foreign policy and programs designed to affirm the principles and values on which Western civilization is based, to strengthen the Atlantic Community, to counter communist strategy, and to direct the forces of the systemic revolution (political, economic, technological, sociological and military) toward the creation of a stable international order, operating under law and the processes of peaceful change.

To relate academic research to the practical operational aspects of foreign policy by providing individuals and organizations, both governmental and private, with analyses of international trends and proposals for policy action.

To contribute toward an improvement in the teaching of international relations in American universities and colleges through the publication of studies and through the training of selected young scholars and teachers on the staff of the Institute.

To train research fellows for service in the research and analysis branches of U.S. foreign policy and national security agencies.

To provide the American public, particularly the molders of public opinion and community leadership groups, with analyses of foreign policy problems confronting the United States.

~ 5 ~

## Personnel and Organization

The Institute is located at 133 South 36th Street, Philadelphia, adjacent to the University of Pennsylvania campus.

Dr. Robert Strausz-Hupé, the Director of the Institute since its founding in 1955, is Professor of Political Science and the former Chairman of the International Relations Group Committee of the University of Pennsylvania.

Dr. William R. Kintner, the Deputy Director of the Institute, is Professor of Political Science at the University of Pennsylvania.

The professional staff of the Institute consists of the Director, Deputy Director, and the following:

Dr. James E. Dougherty, Associate and Senior Staff Member; Professor of Political Science at St. Joseph's College, Philadelphia; Visiting Professor of Political Science at the University of Pennsylvania. (On leave of absence for the academic year 1964-65, Dr. Dougherty serves as Professor of Foreign Affairs at the National War College, Washington, D.C.)

Mr. Robert C. Herber, Assistant to the Director; Managing Editor of ORBIS.

Dr. Robert L. Pfaltzgraff, Jr., Staff Member; Assistant Editor of ORBIS; Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Pennsylvania.

Mr. Joseph W. Reidy, Research Investigator; Director, Latin American Project.

Dr. Sidney I. Ploss, Research Investigator, Assistant Professor of Political Science, University of Pennsylvania.

Mr. David Schwartz, Staff Member.

Miss Diane A. Kressler, Staff Research Assistant.

6

Visiting or part-time personnel include:

Dr. Tai Sung An, Visiting Research Associate; Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Washington College, Chestertown, Maryland.

Mr. William R. Davey, Visiting Research Investigator; Research Associate at the Hudson Institute, New York.

Colonel John L. Frisbee, USAF, Visiting Research Investigator, 1963-64.

Colonel William F. Scott, USAF, Visiting Research Investigator, 1964-65.

Dr. Frank Munk, Visiting Research Investigator; Professor of Political Science, Reed College, Portland, Oregon.

Dr. Sig Synnestvedt, Visiting Research Investigator; Instructor at the Academy of the New Church, Bryn Athyn, Pennsylvania.

The administrative and secretarial staff includes:

Mrs. Margaret Capotrio, Assistant to the Editors of ORBIS.

Mrs. Barbara Cross, Administrative Officer.

Mrs. Diana Fillmore, Secretary to Dr. Strausz-Hupé.

Miss Marilyn G. Tolles, Secretary to Dr. Kintner.

Miss Kay Christiansen, Secretary, Latin American Project.

Miss Christine Mynaugh, Administrative Assistant.

Mrs. Brenda Rosenbaum, Editorial Assistant.

Miss Elaine Eisemann, Editorial Assistant.

Mrs. Linda Compter, Secretary to the Staff.

Most of the members of the professional staff are associated with the University's Department of Political Science and International Relations program, either as faculty members or graduate students. To date, five Institute staff members have received their Ph.D. degrees in the University's graduate programs in International Relations or Political Science and several others are in the process of completing their degree requirements. During the past two years, the Institute

7

expanded its program of providing graduate and post-doctoral fellowships and graduate research assistantships.

In addition to the professional staff, the Institute has enlisted the cooperation in specific research undertakings of consultants affiliated with other universities and organizations. Thus the Institute has drawn on expertise in a wide variety of fields.

The work of the professional staff is supervised and guided by a Board of Associates. Six associates are faculty members of the University of Pennsylvania: Dr. Norman D. Palmer, Professor of Political Science and Chairman of the International Relations Group Committee; Dr. Froelich G. Rainey, Professor of Anthropology and Director of the University Museum; Dr. Arthur P. Whitaker, Professor of Latin American History and Director of a study of Argentine Nationalism carried on in association with the Institute; Dr. Roy F. Nichols, Vice-Provost, Dean of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, and Professor of History; and Drs. Strausz-Hupé and Kintner. The last three are *ex-officio* Associates. The four other Associates are Dr. William Y. Elliott, Professor Emeritus of Government, Harvard University, University Professor, American University, and adviser to the Department of State; Dr. Hans Kohn, Professor Emeritus of History, College of the City of New York, Visiting Professor, Center for Advanced Studies, Wesleyan University; Dr. Stefan T. Possony, Director of International Studies, The Hoover Institution, Stanford University; and Dr. Dougherty.

One of the principal criteria for the selection of Institute Associates has been the extent to which their background combines experience in the academic world with service in government and in private enterprise in the international field. Most of the Associates have served or are serving as consultants to the U.S. government. Each of them, moreover, is a recognized authority in his academic field—Political Science, History, Anthropology, Operations Analysis and International Relations.

The Staff Conferences of the Associates determine the projects to be

8

undertaken by the Institute. These meetings, which are held approximately four times a year, outline the nature and scope of studies, review progress, and subject the final research product to careful examination before publication or distribution. From time to time, officials of the U.S. government, leading scholars, journalists and other specialists in foreign affairs are invited to attend the Staff Conferences.

## FPRI—University Relations

A research group derives many benefits from the favorable intellectual climate which a large university provides. A center for academic training in many disciplines offers a wide latitude for research.

Many of the academic programs of the University of Pennsylvania, and especially the International Relations program, enrich the work of the Foreign Policy Research Institute. Institute personnel take part in both teaching and advanced study in the University. Conversely, many University teachers and students have the opportunity to take advantage of the programs of the Institute—to participate in various seminars and conferences, to publish their findings in ORBIS, the Institute’s quarterly journal of world affairs, to utilize the library and other research facilities of the Institute, and, in some cases, to obtain grants from the Institute for research projects.

The University provides the Institute with such indispensable services as accounting and auditing; it has offered the Institute the services of its fund-raising and contracting offices, the Office of Project Research and Grants, the Development Office, and the Institute for Cooperative Research; and the University has generously reduced overhead charges on grants and contracts received by the Institute.

The Director of the Institute operates under the administrative supervision of the Dean of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, who is an ex-officio Associate. All Institute personnel appointments

9

[10]

are subject to the approval of the Dean and the University's Committee on Appointments and Promotions.

The University's President, Dr. Gaylord P. Harnwell, has given unstintingly his personal support to the programs and activities of the Institute.

## Financial Support

The Institute is a non-profit and tax-exempt organization affiliated with the University of Pennsylvania. It is supported largely by research grants given by private foundations to the Trustees of the University. The Richardson Foundation, Inc., of Greensboro, North Carolina and New York, made the initial grant establishing the Institute. Other foundations subsequently provided the support of the Institute. The principal contributors have been: The Catherwood Foundation, the Dolfinger-McMahon Foundation, the Donner Foundation, Inc. (now Independence Foundation), the Ford Foundation, the Lilly Endowment, Inc., the A. W. Mellon Educational and Charitable Trust, the Pittsburgh Plate Glass Foundation, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Mrs. Alan M. Scaife, Richard M. Scaife and the United States Steel Foundation. A number of other foundations and private corporations and individuals have also made substantial grants to the Institute. Some research is conducted under contract with agencies of the United States government, with private business and with the Institute for Cooperative Research of the University of Pennsylvania.

An advisory committee composed of trustees and friends of the University reviews the Institute's activities and seeks to provide long-range support which will assure a permanent status for the Institute.

### Committee for the Foreign Policy Research Institute

In the summer of 1963 the Honorable John Davis Lodge accepted the invitation of President Gaylord Harnwell to become the Chair-

~~10~~

~~10~~

man of the University Committee for the Foreign Policy Research Institute. Mr. Lodge, a former Governor of Connecticut and a former U.S. Ambassador to Spain, is currently President of Junior Achievement, Incorporated.

The other members of the Committee are:

<table><tr><td>RICHARD C. BOND</td><td>President,<br/>John Wanamaker</td></tr><tr><td>WILLIAM L. DAY</td><td>Chairman of the Board,<br/>the First Pennsylvania<br/>Banking &amp; Trust Company</td></tr><tr><td>ROBERT DECHERT</td><td>Attorney,<br/>Dechert, Price and<br/>Rhoads</td></tr><tr><td>MORRIS DUANE</td><td>Attorney, Duane, Morris<br/>and Heckscher</td></tr><tr><td>HON. GERALD F. FLOOD</td><td>Judge, Superior Court<br/>of Pennsylvania</td></tr><tr><td>EDWARD HOPKINSON, JR.</td><td>Partner, Drexel and<br/>Company</td></tr><tr><td>FREDERICK B. HUFNAGEL, JR.</td><td>Assistant to the Vice-<br/>President, Sun Oil<br/>Company</td></tr><tr><td>PERCY C. MADEIRA, JR.</td><td>Chairman, Board of<br/>Managers, the Museum<br/>of the University of<br/>Pennsylvania</td></tr><tr><td>ARTHUR W. RADFORD</td><td>Consultant, Bankers<br/>Trust Company</td></tr><tr><td>CHARLES E. SALTZMANN</td><td>Partner, Goldman, Sachs<br/>and Company</td></tr><tr><td>MORRIS WOLF</td><td>Attorney, Wolf, Block,<br/>Schorr and Solis-Cohen</td></tr></table>

11

Research and Publications, 1962-64

*Books in the Institute Series*

*Building the Atlantic World.* In December 1962 the Institute completed a study of U.S. policy toward the Atlantic Community. It was published in July 1963 under the title, *Building the Atlantic World*, by Harper & Row. This work, supported by a grant from the A. W. Mellon Educational and Charitable Trust, represents the culmination of many years of effort. From the beginning, the Institute has had as its major objective the study of the Atlantic world and its potentials for growing into a true community of nations. *Building the Atlantic World* explores the major political, economic and military problems confronting the Atlantic nations, and proposes measures which the Atlantic nations and, particularly, the United States might adopt to strengthen the Atlantic world and bind it more closely together.

*Walter Lippmann's Philosophy of International Politics.* The Institute agreed in 1963 to sponsor the publication of a book which traces the development of the views and philosophy of Walter Lippmann on international relations and U.S. foreign policy. The author, Dr. Anwar Syed, currently Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Massachusetts, was one of the first research assistants to work at the Institute. The book was published in February 1964 by the University of Pennsylvania Press.

*The United States and the United Nations.* In 1962 the Institute invited Dr. Franz Gross, Chairman of the Division of Liberal Arts, Pennsylvania Military College, and Visiting Professor of Political Science, University of Pennsylvania, to edit a symposium on U.S. diplomacy in the United Nations and the problems arising from the admission of new states to UN membership. The University of Oklahoma Press published these papers as a book in November 1964.

*Previous books in the FPRI series are listed at the end of this report.

~~ 12 ~~

Orbis

ORBIS, the quarterly journal of world affairs published by the Institute, completed its seventh year of publication in the Winter of 1963-64. ORBIS provides a forum for the views of American and foreign statesmen, scholars and research analysts, who examine major problems of U.S. foreign policy and international relations, including such subjects as communist policies and bloc affairs, military strategy, arms control, the Atlantic Alliance, foreign aid, and regional and country studies.

Among articles published in ORBIS during 1963 and 1964 are the following:

<table><tr><td>Trans-Himalayan Confrontation</td><td>Norman D. Palmer</td></tr><tr><td>The Cuban Crisis</td><td>Robert D. Crane</td></tr><tr><td>NATO and the European Economic Community</td><td>Walter Hallstein</td></tr><tr><td>Toward Nuclear Isolationism?</td><td>Stefan T. Possony</td></tr></table>

Soviet Economic Growth:

<table><tr><td>Performance and Prospect</td><td>Robert Strausz-Hupé</td></tr><tr><td>France and Her Allies</td><td>Hervé Alphand</td></tr><tr><td>Restraints, Strategy and Arms Control</td><td>George Pugh</td></tr><tr><td>U.S. Strategy and the Defense of Europe</td><td>Pierre Gallois</td></tr><tr><td>Untangling the NATO Alliance</td><td>S. F. Giffin</td></tr><tr><td>Zonal Arms Limitation in Europe</td><td>James E. Dougherty</td></tr><tr><td>Sino-Soviet Relations After Khrushchev and Mao</td><td>John R. Thomas</td></tr><tr><td>Laos and the Defense of Southeast Asia</td><td>Frank N. Trager</td></tr><tr><td>Power and Leadership in the Arab World</td><td>H. B. Sharabi</td></tr><tr><td>The Economic Impacts of Disarmament</td><td>Francis P. Hoeber</td></tr><tr><td>The Mainsprings of Soviet Secrecy</td><td>Walter F. Hahn</td></tr><tr><td>A New Strategy for Foreign Economic Aid</td><td>Daniel Wit</td></tr><tr><td>NATO's Nuclear Problems:</td><td></td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td>Control or Consultation</td><td>Frederick W. Mulley</td></tr><tr><td>Mao Tse-tung and Peaceful Coexistence</td><td>Tang Tsou</td></tr></table>

13

["Latin America and the Atlantic Triangle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

ism in other Latin American countries. The chief purpose of this study, which is being carried out under a Rockefeller Foundation grant, is to provide several young American scholars with closely supervised training in research techniques and graduate study in modern Latin American history. It also aims to contribute to the elucidation of the idea of 20th century nationalism in underdeveloped and semi-developed lands; to promote a better understanding of the recent history of Argentina, particularly in its relations with, and impact on, other Latin American countries; and to provide material which will be valuable in dealing with current policy problems in Latin America, especially with regard to Argentina.

## A Strategic Study on Latin America

In June 1962 the Institute initiated a study of U.S. policies and programs in Latin America with the objective of producing recommendations regarding the promotion of U.S. strategic interests in this critical area.

The study examines the significance of Latin America to the national security of the United States, particular emphasis being placed upon the political and sociological factors which render that area vulnerable to communist strategy. It reappraises U.S. policies and seeks to formulate policies and programs both to combat external threats and to meet the most pressing of Latin America's problems. It analyzes the role of certain key groups in Latin American life—including teachers, students, organized labor and military elites—to whom the communists have appealed with varying degrees of success.

Mr. Joseph W. Reidy, Director of this Project, joined the Institute after serving for thirteen years in the U.S. government, his last assignments being with the U.S. State Department in Rio de Janeiro and Buenos Aires. Dr. Sig Synnestvedt has served as the chief research associate of the project. Project consultants included Dr. Arthur P. Whitaker, Ambassador Merwin L. Bohan, Dr. John C. Dreier, and Dr. George Wythe. A number of graduate students at the University of Pennsylvania have given research assistance to the project.

~~15~~

~~~

The Latin American research project terminated in June 1964. The major product of the study will be a book, the tentative title of which is *Strategy for the Americas*.

## Constituency Labour Parties in Britain

In the summer of 1962, the Institute contributed toward the support of a research project on the British Labour Party's foreign policy views undertaken by Dr. G. Edward Janosik, Associate Professor of Political Science, University of Pennsylvania. Dr. Janosik spent the 1962-63 academic year in the United Kingdom conducting research for a larger study of the organizations, views and influence of the British Constituency Labour Parties. He contributed an article, "Britain's New Labour Leaders," to the Fall 1963 issue of ORBIS. Dr. Janosik returned to Britain in October 1964 to study the role of the Constituency Labour Parties in the national election.

## The Arms Problem and U.S. Policy

Dr. James E. Dougherty is engaged in a major study of the problems of arms control and disarmament negotiations. Scheduled for completion late in 1964, this study will deal with the following topics: Western moral, psychological and political attitudes toward the arms problem; the Nth country problem; the economics of disarmament; arms control and the Atlantic Alliance; the technical and political obstacles to general and complete disarmament; the prospects for partial arms control measures; and the implications of arms control for U.S. policy.

## The British Decision to Seek Membership in the Common Market

In 1963 Robert L. Pfaltzgraff, Jr., an Institute Staff Member, spent several months in the United Kingdom under a grant from the Penfield Fund of the University of Pennsylvania. He conducted research on the development of support in Britain for membership in the European Economic Community. Early in 1964 the completed study was accepted by the Political Science Faculty in partial satis-

~~ 16 ~~

faction of the requirements for the doctoral degree. Dr. Pfaltzgraff's
study, revised in the light of subsequent developments, will be pub-
lished in 1965.

*Changing Patterns of Alignment and Non-Alignment*

Several staff members and research assistants of the Institute are
engaged in a study which seeks to survey and analyze patterns of
alignment and non-alignment policies of all nations during the period
1953-1963. One purpose of this study is to ascertain the shifts of
"neutralist" policies under the pressures and developments of the
Cold War. More than forty political, economic, cultural and military
indicators have been selected to supply the necessary information.
Patterns of alignment and non-alignment will be deduced from data
processing including computer analysis. The results of this study
will be published in a monograph.

*The Status of the Jewish Minority in the USSR*

In the fall of 1964 Elehie Skoczylas and other FPRI members com-
pleted a study of the status of the Jewish minority residing within the
boundaries of the USSR. The purpose of this investigation was to
test Soviet claims to have established in the USSR a classless society,
to have eradicated national animosities, and to have granted every
national group the right to free development of its cultural and
ethnic traits. The study seeks to determine the actual conditions of
Soviet society and the minorities policies of the Soviet government,
e.g., whether the Soviet government (a) actively seeks to improve
the lot of minority groups, (b) merely tolerates discrimination of
national minorities, or (c) creates situations, through official actions,
which engender the discrimination of national minorities, in par-
ticular the Jewish people.

*U.S. Policy Toward Eastern Europe*

The FPRI has begun a comprehensive study of U.S. policy toward
Eastern Europe. The principal purpose of this endeavor is to deter-

17

mine whether past policies have served U.S. national interests, and whether new approaches to this part of the communist empire might hold more promise of success. In addition to examining the area as a whole, each satellite nation will be treated individually. Soviet policies toward each will also receive close attention. The study will search for a policy which will enable the United States to exploit weaknesses within the Soviet satellite system and to contribute to the eventual liberation of the East European peoples.

## Books of Readings in International Relations and NATO

The Institute has begun the preparation of two books of readings. One book will contain readings related to the general field of International Relations, with selections on such topics as nationalism and the nation-state system, the concept and uses of power in interstate relations, the elements of national power, the techniques and instruments which nations employ in relations with each other, and the various methods designed to bring order and stability to the international scene. This book of readings will be useful as supplemental reading material for advanced undergraduate university students who are already using one of the standard texts on International Relations.

The second book is designed to bring together important documentary materials on the history of NATO, such as Council communiques and significant committee reports; selections from national legislative debates and hearings pertaining to NATO problems; major addresses and press conferences of leading statesmen in NATO countries; and excerpts from important books and articles dealing with the crucial issues confronting NATO since its inception. Such a book will serve both as a basic text for university courses on Atlantic Community affairs and as a standard reference work on the history of NATO. None of these exists at the present time.

## Africa and the West

In 1963 several staff researchers began to revise a 1959 staff paper, based on a field study, in preparation for a broader study of the

18

political, economic, military and strategic situation in Africa. The
principal subjects which will be treated in this study are: Africa's
political, economic, and social problems; political development in
Africa; African-European-American relationships; and the role of
Africa in the international community.

The Mass Media and U.S.-Latin American Relations

In the fall of 1963 the Institute initiated two related projects con-
cerned with the need for improving communications and under-
standing between Latin America and the United States. The first
project will seek to determine the degree to which mass media
in Latin America influence the formulation of national foreign
policies, especially policies toward the United States. The mass
media in Argentina will be used as a case study. The second project
will evaluate mass media coverage of Latin American developments
in the United States and attempt to suggest ways of improving
this coverage. The FPRI has employed an experienced journalist and
former U.S. government official, William G. Dildine, to carry out
this project in Buenos Aires.

The Future of the Atlantic Alliance

The FPRI has begun a study of the organizational, political and
military problems of the Atlantic Alliance. The purpose is to pre-
pare a book and several articles as the Institute's contribution to
the debate in which the United States and Western Europe are likely
to engage as the crucial year of 1969—when members may give
notice of withdrawal from NATO—approaches.

Elites and International Integration

Concurrently with the preceding project, the Institute will seek to identify the significant elites in selected countries of the North Atlantic area and to ascertain their role in developing European and Atlantic institutions. Members of the Institute will conduct depth interviews with key members of political parties, civil servants,

~~ 19 ~~

military leaders, trade union officials, faculty members, businessmen and journalists in the United States, Canada and Europe. It is anticipated that this study will contribute to general knowledge in the field of elite theory and, specifically, to an understanding of the role played by elites in the formation of political communities at the international level.

## Papers on Soviet Politics

Dr. Sidney I. Ploss, in a series of occasional papers on Soviet politics, is setting out to analyze current issues and factional alignments in the Soviet system of closed politics, and to interpret their effect on official behavior and policies. These reports are intended to offer scarce background material to interested persons in the academic, journalistic and governmental communities. The first report was completed on September 28, 1964 and supplemented on October 19, 1964 with preliminary notes on the leadership changes in the USSR. Several reports are scheduled to appear in 1965.

## The Political Multiplier of Foreign Aid

The Institute provided financial assistance in the summer of 1964 to Dr. Karl von Vorys, Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Pennsylvania, in support of his research project on the relationship between economic and political development. The primary purpose of Dr. von Vorys' project is to arrive at some general theories on the relationship between foreign aid and political stability, based upon and supported by empirical evidence. Particular attention will be given to the newly independent nations of South Asia.

## Government Contracts

### The Psychopolitical Environment of Modern Conflict

Under contract to the Institute for Cooperative Research of the University of Pennsylvania, the FPRI has completed in recent years several studies on the psychopolitical environment of modern con-

~~20~~

~~20~~

flict. These studies are conducted on an interdisciplinary basis within
this University. During 1963-1964 the FPRI completed one of these
studies and began another.

*The Department of the Army Command and Control System*

In February 1964 the Institute completed a study on the implications of U.S. Army organization roles and missions to the conceptual design of the Army's command and control system. This study, undertaken on a subcontract to the Stanford Research Institute, examined the trends toward centralization within the Department of Defense and the impact which the establishment of a command and control system capable of functioning in a nuclear environment would have on the doctrine of civilian control of the Armed Forces. This study was incorporated in a Stanford Research Institute Report under the title, *A Summarization of the Army Plans and Command-Control Concepts*.

*The Political Command and Control of NATO Forces*

In June 1964 the FPRI completed a study of the political command and control problems of U.S. forces in Western Europe and their relationship to the NATO military command structure. The purpose of this study, undertaken on behalf of the U.S. Department of the Army through a subcontract with the Stanford Research Institute, was to determine whether U.S. policies for deliberate, selective and controlled response (DSC) to Soviet aggression can be applied in Western Europe within the framework of NATO. This study is addressed to an examination of the objections of some European NATO members to the U.S. strategic concept of DSC, to wit, that Europe, primarily concerned with deterring war rather than limiting a conflict already underway, fears that DSC might undermine the credibility of the deterrent. These strategic arguments were taken into account in designing a command and control system for NATO that would serve both U.S. and European interests. This study was incorporated into a Stanford Research Institute Report under the title, *The Political Command and Control of NATO Forces*.

≈ 21 ≈

["## Arms Control in Europe", "During the latter half of 1963 the FPRI entered into a subcontract with the Stanford Research Institute to assist the latter Institute in preparing a study on \"The Military Implications of Disarmament and Arms Control Concepts in the European Theater\" for the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency. The FPRI undertook to analyze certain arms control concepts and to make various political-strategic projections for the European area which would have a bearing upon East-West arms negotiations. This project was completed in June 1964.", "## Counterforce and Alternative U.S. Strategies", "The FPRI is under contract to the U.S. Air Force to prepare a study on \"Counterforce and Alternative U.S. Strategies.\" Its objective is to analyze the range of strategic options available to the United States with particular attention to the feasibility of maintaining a second-strike counterforce strategy throughout the 1960's, and to examine all strategic options which would serve U.S. interests. U.S. strategies will be appraised in the light of U.S. policy objectives, including the maintenance of alliance systems. The final product of the study will be a classified report to the Air Force which will include a recommended optimum U.S. strategy and force posture, and an unclassified report placing feasible options in a coherent framework comprehensible to the government generalist and the interested layman. An interim report was submitted in January 1964 and the project will be completed by April 1965.", "At the request of the U.S. Air Force, the Institute has augmented this project to include a study of crisis management. This study will seek to identify factors *composing* a crisis and to evaluate the decision-making process in both the United States and the Soviet Union for *controlling* a crisis situation. Through a detailed evaluation of previous crises, a crisis model will be constructed. This model will be used as a tool for anticipating reactions to future crises and", " "~ 22 ~"]

judging the effect upon military strategy. The purpose of the study
is to design a practical method of utilizing military strategy in con-
trolling crises.

The following individuals have served as consultants:

Dandridge Cole, General Electric Company

Robert D. Crane, Center for Strategic Studies,
Georgetown University

Francis Hoeber, Stanford Research Institute

General Henry Hughlin, General Electric Company

Thomas Schelling, Center for International Affairs,
Harvard University

Anthony J. Wiener, Hudson Institute

Thomas W. Wolfe, Social Science Department, RAND Corporation

## Conferences and Other Activities

During the course of the past two years, FPRI Staff Members and Associates have been invited to participate in, and address, a number of conferences sponsored by universities, governmental agencies and research institutes. These included:

Conferences at the Center for Strategic Studies, Georgetown University, on "National Security: The Demands of Strategy and Economics" and "NATO: Problems and Prospects," and a Colloquium on Southeast Asia;

European-American Colloquium at the Washington Center of Foreign Policy Research;

The Atlantic Institute in Paris;

The NATO Parliamentarians' Conference in Paris;

Study Groups, Council on Foreign Relations;

Institute of Strategic Studies, Christ Church, Oxford;

The Second German-American Conference, Wiesbaden, Germany;

Gesellschaft für Wehrkunde—*Encounter*, Munich;

23

The Fifth Strategy for Peace Conference, Airlie, Virginia;

The Second Conference of the U.S. Congress of Scientists on Survival, New York;

The Brookings Institution UN Summer Seminar at Airlie, Virginia;

Conference of the Catholic Association for International Peace;

The Freedom House Conference on Problem Areas Affecting Freedom;

The Governors' Conference on Cold War Education, Florida;

The 1963 Annual Atlantic Treaty Association Meeting, Ankara, Turkey;

Senior U.S. Armed Service Colleges; and

University of Pennsylvania Alumni Club Meetings.

The FPRI was host to a three-day *Conference on Alternative Strategies*, November 1964, attended by thirty operations analysts, area specialists and officers of the U.S. Army, Navy and Air Force.

Staff Members were requested by the Congressional Joint Committee on Atomic Energy and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to testify and prepare statements on the issues of the nuclear test ban negotiations and the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.

Members of the FPRI Staff made frequent appearances on educational radio and television programs mostly in support of the World Affairs Council of Philadelphia. The FPRI assisted the World Affairs Council in the planning of some of these programs and in the recruitment of participants. FPRI Staff Members served as speakers and discussion panel participants in various community programs.

Staff Members and Associates served as consultants to various institutions, including the Institute for Cooperative Research of the University of Pennsylvania, the Institute for Defense Analyses, the Stanford Research Institute, the Atlantic Institute, Paris, The Atlantic Council, Washington, and the Economics Committee, NATO Parliamentarians' Conference.

24

BOOKS IN THE INSTITUTE SERIES, 1955-1961:

ARGENTINE UPHEAVAL: THE FALL OF PERON AND THE NEW REGIME.
By Arthur P. Whitaker (New York: Praeger.)

AMERICAN-ASIAN TENSIONS. Edited by Robert Strausz-Hupé, Alvin J. Cottrell, and James E. Dougherty. (New York: Praeger.)

AN INQUIRY INTO SOVIET MENTALITY. By Gerhart Niemeyer, assisted by John S. Reshetar, Jr. (New York: Praeger.)

THE STRUCTURE OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY OF THE SOVIET UNION. By Boris Meissner, edited with a Chapter on the 20th Party Congress by John S. Reshetar, Jr. (New York: Praeger.)

LATIN AMERICA, DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMMING AND UNITED STATES INVESTMENTS. By Clement G. Motten, Virgil Salera, Richard L. Davies, H. W. Balgooyen. (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.)

THE IDEA OF COLONIALISM. Edited by Robert Strausz-Hupé and Harry W. Hazard. (New York: Praeger.)

THE SOUL OF CHINA. By Amaury de Riencourt. (New York: Coward McCann, Inc.)

COMMUNISM IN GUATEMALA. By Ronald M. Schneider. (New York: Praeger.)

THE RECONSTRUCTION OF IRAQ, 1950-57. By Fahim I. Qubain, with a foreword by Robert Strausz-Hupé. (New York: Praeger.)

PROTRACTED CONFLICT. By Robert Strausz-Hupé, William R. Kintner, James E. Dougherty, and Alvin J. Cottrell. (New York: Harper.)*

A CONCISE HISTORY OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY OF THE SOVIET UNION. By John S. Reshetar, Jr. (New York: Praeger.)

NASSER'S NEW EGYPT. By Keith Wheelock. (New York: Praeger.)

A FORWARD STRATEGY FOR AMERICA. By Robert Strausz-Hupé, William R. Kintner and Stefan T. Possony. (New York: Harper.)

SUN YAT-SEN AND COMMUNISM. By Shao Chuan Leng and Norman D. Palmer. (New York: Praeger.)

The Institute also prepared a book for the Institute for American Strategy:

AMERICAN STRATEGY FOR THE NUCLEAR AGE. Walter F. Hahn and John C. Neff, Editors. (Garden City, New York: A Doubleday Anchor Original.)

*Published in 1963 as a paperback in the Harper Colophon Series, with a new Preface and an Epilogue.

26

Joan Blanchard
Personal Secretary

Sincerely yours,

time.

your letter to his attention at that

office early in July and I will bring

He is expected to return to the

your letter of June 13th.

writing to acknowledge the receipt of

In Dr. Kissinger's absence, I am

Dear Mr. Kintner:

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104
Room 103-133 South 36th Street
Foreign Policy Research Institute
University of Pennsylvania
Deputy Director
Mr. William R. Kintner

June 17, 1962

August 9, 1966

Dear Bill:

Thank you for your nice note about my article. It reminded me how long it has been since we have seen each other. Though we have not been in as close touch as I would have liked over recent years, I want you to know with how much pleasure I think back to our past association and how much I have admired the integrity with which you have maintained your position over the years.

Do let us make an effort to get together.

Warm regards.

cc: Kraemer

Henry A. Klaaijder

to Bill Kintner.

a copy of the enclosed letter I wrote

I thought you might like to see

My venerable Krämer:

Washington, D.C.
4319 Feasenden Street, N.W.
Dr. Fritz Krämer

August 9, 1966

Henry A. Klaander

Sincerely yours,

Wish,
With warm regards and every good

and best,
together on December 6. What time would you
Why don't we plan to spend some time

Dear Bill:

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104
133 South 36th Street
University of Pennsylvania
Room 103
Foreign Policy Research Institute
Mr. William R. Klaander

November 8, 1966