Ministère des Sciences et de l'Enseignement supérieur

Le Ministre

April 17, 1974

Mr. And Mrs. Gustav Hauser
Stroock & Stroock & Lavan
61 Broadway, 16th Floor
New York, N. Y. 10006

Dear Mr. and Mrs. Hauser,

I have been informed by His Excellency Mr. Fereydoun Hoveyda, the Permanent Representative of Iran to the United Nations, that you are planning to visit Iran in order to study the way in which the Government accomodates foreign students, the problems confronting Iranian students and professional exchanges with the United States. Mr. Hoveyda has also advised me that you would like to investigate investment opportunities for the United States in Iran.

I would be very happy to receive you and arrange for you to visit with the authorities concerned.

Hoping to have the opportunity to meet you in Tehran and to discuss matters of mutual interest.

Yours sincerely,
M. Shahgholi, M. D.
Manouchehr Minister of Science and Higher Education

MSH/jg

TO THE EDITOR
The New York Times

September 11, 1973

The search for purity in politics dominates Pennington Haile's recent letter calling on the Senate to reject the nomination of Henry Kissinger as Secretary of State.

Mr. Kissinger's major task, if confirmed, will be to help formulate and carry out the foreign policy of this country, as determined by our President. His skills in this task are already well established. The nation will be well served if, in Mr. Kissinger, it finds a clear-headed official motivated essentially to help provide the preconditions of a stable and peaceful international society. The latter is possible only if our government properly assesses world trends and correctly evaluates America's responses and required initiatives.

Those very qualities, so admirably noted in Mr. Kissinger, are dismissed by Mr. Haile as "expediency". To my mind, they constitute the essence of sound foreign policy leadership.

I am sure the Senate will confirm Mr. Kissinger for this very reason.

REH/ms

SEPTEMBER 11, 1973

# Letters to the Editor

## Why the Senate Should Reject Kissinger

To the Editor:

It seems a foregone conclusion that Henry Kissinger will be confirmed as Secretary of State by the Senate. But I am convinced that there are decisive reasons for refusing to confirm his nomination.

Our country has had enough of power politics on the part of the White House. It has had far too much of the playing of such politics by methods of concealment and deceit. In the use of such methods Mr. Kissinger has been a willing collaborator. He cooperated in the prolongation of the war in Indochina under the pretense of speeding its end. He—and this seems to me unforgivable—connived in the official lying and deception concerning the bombing of Cambodia. As a member of the National Security Council he knew of and must have approved falsifying reports of the savagage attacks upon a country which had tried hard to remain neutral. I do not think a man who has helped so to deceive the American people should be entrusted by their representatives with high office.

Mr. Kissinger probably cares little for the people. His heroes are Metter-

nich and Castlereagh, who, after the defeat of Napoleon, sketched the scheme for the diplomatic manipulation of Europe. In that scheme the people of the nations whose fate was being decided played no part.

Thus it may be natural for Mr. Kissinger to cooperate with a President to whom the American people appear as “children.” But it may seem strange to some of us that a man whose family fled from an evil dictator now participates in the attempt to establish that sort of elitist control which so easily becomes the prelude to dictatorship. Henry Kissinger has shown no understanding whatsoever of what the politics of democracy should be.

It is for these reasons that I think Mr. Kissinger's nomination should not be confirmed. That he is clever no one doubts. But what we sorely need now in those who are to lead us is honesty, integrity, a sense of morality rather than expediency, and that he possess these qualities is by no means so evident.

PENNINGTON, HAILE

Norwich, Vt., Sept. 4, 1973

- 3 -

[L]

In this connection, I should report that on Tuesday the Senate adopted an amendment to the Foreign Aid Authorization Bill, which urged the President to create a Bureau of Humanitarian and Social Services. As stated in the amendment, the Bureau would "provide continuing guidance and coordination to policies, activities, and programs within the Executive Branch relating to humanitarian assistance for refugees and victims of natural disaster, migration and visa affairs, international human rights, liaison with the United Nations and other appropriate international agencies or non-governmental organizations, and such other humanitarian and social affairs as the Secretary of State may prescribe."

Hopefully, Mr. Chairman, the amendment will be sustained in the Conference Report on Foreign Aid -- and that the Administration will now give its full support to accomplishing a long recognized objective.

Third, the United States should actively encourage and support a meaningful revision of the Geneva Conventions of 1949. Under the auspices of the Swiss Government and the International Committee of the Red Cross, a diplomatic conference for this purpose will be held in Geneva in February 1974. Your concurrent resolution on this matter, Mr. Chairman, suggests the kinds of items which need revision. Clearly the laws of war must apply to guerrilla combat and civil conflict. Restrictions must be placed on the aerial bombardment of populated areas - and on the use of incendiary weapons, such as napalm, and fragmentation bombs. Greater concentrations are needed for civilian populations, for the sick and wounded, and for prisoners of war.

In this connection, and as a follow-up to the Geneva Conference, I would also recommend, that active consideration be given by our government and others to the convening of a separate conference on the Hague Conventions of 1907. The tremendous development of weaponry since World War I makes an updating of these conventions imperative.

Fourth, the United States should actively encourage and support the creation of a United Nations Emergency Service (UNES), to fully implement the 1971 General Assembly resolution authorizing the Secretary-General to appoint an Under-Secretary for disaster relief.

There is today no broad-based and continuing mechanism for rendering massive emergency assistance to populations ravaged by conflict and oppression or natural disaster. Although a large number of international public and private organizations, including those within the United Nations, exist for this purpose, the fact remains that these organizations are too often limited in what they can do by their individual mandate, tradition, political or regional association, and small resources.

A United Nations Emergency Service would meet a longstanding need in the international community, and is a logical extension of United Nations activities on humanitarian issues.

And Fifth, the United States should continue its efforts with other governments to establish a United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.

In conclusion let me say that our country freely uses its great influence and power in many ways and for many ends. But the power to heal and rehabilitate the hapless victims of conflict and disaster -- and our potential influence in behalf of human rights -- is not being used in a measure commensurate with the other uses of our power. And this will only change when our national leadership, including the Congress, makes human rights and the well-being of people a primary concern in our foreign policy and relations -- and in our commitments overseas.

The outside world touches America today as never before -- more so, perhaps, than we ever thought possible. In a sense, the degree of interdependence among the nations of the world today is

--more----

Law Offices of

STROOCK & STROOCK & LAVAN
61 Broadway, New York, N.Y. 10006

Memorandum re:

To: Henry A. Kissinger

From: Rita E. Hauser

Date October 5, 1973

I am sorry I missed talking to you in advance of my testimony yesterday before the House Foreign Affairs Committee on the subject of international human rights, as I was asked about the President's views on the proposal to establish a Bureau of Humanitarian Affairs within the State Department - among other things. Senator Kennedy testified just before me, and, as expected, was very critical of the Nixon Administration. He indicated that the Administration's response to the above noted proposal would be a "test" of your interest in and sincerity as to human rights matters, especially since the Senate just adopted an amendment to the Foreign Aid Bill urging the President to create such a Bureau.

I would urge you to give serious and immediate consideration to the proposal and, indeed, turn it into an Administration initiative rather than a defensive response.

I harbor no illusions that human rights considerations will or should dictate our foreign policy, as Kennedy urges. But it is a factor, and there is an enormous American constituency vitally involved in these questions, to wit, church and volunteer relief agencies, civil rights groups, labor and farm groups, League for the Rights of Man, etc. Establishing a Bureau in the State Department dedicated to their interests and energies would be a great plus for you and for our President, for it shows the right high-level concern and gives the groups an opportunity to be heard and "consulted" in the formulation of foreign policy.

And you surely will hear from them. I dealt with the whole range of them when I served at the UN Human Rights Commission, from the Irish-Americans, to the pro-Biafians to the Arab and Jewish supporters. They are all very emotional as to their particular cause and bear the passions of the dedicated. They are trying to deal with (much hand-holding, speechmaking, etc.), but the effort is very worthwhile to satisfy an important element of the domestic constituency and the Congress which responds directly to it.

cont'd/...

Henry A. Kissinger

October 5, 1973

Page Two.

I would be happy to talk to you about this. As you can sense, I think the President needs so badly to do some good things, some "right" things vis-a-vis the American public, that will help re-establish him as a humane and decent leader in the eyes of American civic leaders whose judgment of him conditions that of millions of others.

x x x

I also wanted to chat with you about an FSO, Robert Oakley, now posted in Beirut. Bob served as my assistant and general adviser at the UN Mission, especially on Mid-East affairs. We have become fast friends. I admire his intelligence, objectivity and dedication to our country. I saw him last month on his home leave and we visited with our UN Secretariat friends and caught up on the Mid-East. We also see eye to eye on the Middle East, even though we approach the problems from opposite ends. He is really an extraordinary fellow. Hal Saunders knows him well, too.

REH

REH/ms

93D CONGRESS
1ST SESSION

H. R. 10455

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 20, 1973

Mr. FRASER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs

A BILL

To establish within the Department of State a Bureau of Humanitarian Affairs, and for other purposes.

1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

2. That the Congress finds and declares—

4. (1) that under the Charter of the United Nations, member states are obliged to take joint and separate action in cooperation with the United Nations to promote respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion;

10. (2) that the Department of State does not have a bureau or senior level official specifically charged with

11.

I

2

1 the responsibility of overseeing the humanitarian factors
2 in foreign policy decisionmaking;

3 (3) that the United States response to both nat-
4 ural and manmade disasters requires more effective co-
5 ordination between the relevant Federal agencies; and

6 (4) that frequently factors of human rights are
given inadequate attention in foreign policy decision-
making.
8

9
10 a Bureau of Humanitarian Affairs, to be headed by an
11 Assistant Secretary of State for Humanitarian Affairs. He
12 shall be appointed by the President by and with the advice
13 and consent of the Senate, and he shall be charged with all
14 authority in the administration of the functions of such
15 Bureau which are delegated to him or conferred to him by
16 the Secretary of State in the areas of human rights, assistance
17 for refugees, people migrating across international bound-
18 aries, and victims of natural disasters and of wars occurring
19 outside the United States.

20 SEC. 3. Under the general direction of the Secretary of
21 State, the Assistant Secretary of State so designated shall
22 have the responsibility for advising the Department on all
23 matters having significant human rights implications.

24 (a) The Assistant Secretary shall be responsible for pre-
25 paring a human rights impact memorandum for all Govern-

[LC]

3

1 ment decisions and foreign events which have significant hu-

2 man rights implications.

3 (b) The Assistant Secretary in reviewing situations in-

4 volving serious violations of human rights shall consider ad-

5 vising the Secretary of State to undertake diplomatic initia-

6 tives, to suspend economic assistance, military assistance or

7 sales, or take other appropriate measures with respect to the

8 government concerned.

9 SEC. 4. It shall be the policy of the United States Gov- 10 ernment to terminate all military assistance and sales to any

11 government committing serious violations of human rights,

12 and to suspend any economic assistance directly supportive

13 of the government committing such violations. Serious viola-

14 tions of human rights are defined as situations involving a

15 widespread pattern of denial of the fundamental rights set

16 forth in articles 1, 3, and 5 of the Universal Declaration of

17 Human Rights which proclaim, respectively, that—

18 (1) "All human beings are born free and equal in
19 dignity and rights;

20 (2) "Everyone has the right to life, liberty, and
21 security of person;

22 (3) "No one shall be subjected to torture or to
cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.".

24 SEC. 5. It shall be the policy of the United States

25 Government henceforth to suspend any economic assistance

4

1 which is utilized by the government concerned in a dis-

2 criminatory manner in violation of the principles set forth

3 in article 1 of the Charter of the United Nations.

4 SEC. 6. (a) Section 5315 (22) of title 5, United States

5 Code, is amended by striking out "11" and inserting in lieu

6 thereof "12".

7 (b) The first section of the Act entitled "An Act to

8 strengthen and improve the organization and administra-

9 tion of the Department of State, and for other purposes",

10 approved May 26, 1949 (22 U.S.C. 2652), is amended by

11 striking out "eleven" and inserting in lieu thereof "twelve".

THE SECRETARY OF STATE
WASHINGTON

January 30, 1974

Dear Rita:

Thank you for your kind words in your recent
memorandum to me.

I'm delighted that the intellectual's meeting
was a success and I will certainly appreciate any
support they might give.

I have recently written Chairman Fulbright
to express our support for the Genocide Convention
and hope that the Senate will soon act favorably on
it.

The Honorable
Rita E. Hauser,
Stroock & Stroock & Lavan,
61 Broadway,
New York, New York.

Law Offices of

Memorandum re:

Date

To: Henry Kissinger

From: Rita E. Hauser

You were absolutely sensational. Words can't indicate how overjoyed so many of us were at your efforts and your success. You merit a big hug and a kiss when I see you next.

The intellectuals' meeting we had before you left has paid off. Word of your good intentions has spread throughout the Jewish community and I think this will be invaluable help in the face of certain right-wing Israeli opposition to the settlement. I expect that a number of the major intellectual figures will be speaking up and writing in support of your approach.

On a completely different front, it appears that debate on the Genocide Convention is scheduled for the 24th but probably will not begin until the 28th. We have worked on this for years and the moment of truth is at hand. There are four key Republican senators whose support is indispensable. I have contacted each of them many times but they all still are uncommitted.

If you have a moment, nothing could be of greater value on this front than for you to call Senators Baker, Brock, Cook and Dole. Their support will bring other Republicans along. Since the Nixon Administration is strongly behind ratification of the Convention, I do not want to see a Senate defeat when the issue is voted. Moreover, support from the Administration will go a long way with constituents you need in your Middle East efforts.

Please have someone advise me of your steps on the above so that we can coordinate the effort.

With best regards.

REH/ms

Stroock & Stroock & Lavan

61 Broadway
New York, New York 10006

TELEPHONE (212) 425-5200
TELEX STROOCK 620367
CABLE ADDRESS "PLASTROOCK"

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20036
1100 CONNECTICUT AVENUE, N.W.
TELEPHONE (202) 293-1990
CABLE ADDRESS
PLASTROOCK-WASHINGTON, D.C.

PARIS 8°, FRANCE
18-20 PLACE DE LA MADELEINE
TELEPHONE 742-23-33
CABLE ADDRESS
PLASTROOCK-PARIS

February 14, 1974

Hon. Henry A. Kissinger
Secretary of State
The State Department
Washington, D.C.

Dear Henry:

Thanks for your help on the Genocide Convention. I am sorry we lost the battle after so much effort, but it was worth a fight nevertheless.

I just got back yesterday from a week's stay in Beirut where I met with numerous of the Palestinian intellectuals and leaders in addition to my Lebanese friends. I have some keen reflections I would like to share with you but, above all else, it is essential that the Palestinian end be attended to as quickly as possible lest despair set in. Even if a substantive conclusion is not available yet, I think it would be extremely helpful to make informal contact and bring them into the act. It is no secret that they are very concerned about the new U.S. Ambassador, and this makes for yet another reason to assure them of our correct intentions.

I will be at the State Department on the 26th for an all-morning meeting. If you are around, maybe we can chat about what I picked up in Lebanon. In any event, I am available all next week here in New York.

Best regards.

REH/ms

Re: Venezuela

For a significant number of the scholarship holders, the IIE will provide all of the foregoing services; for others who may place themselves in American institutions, the IIE will provide services numbers 2 through 6 listed above.

The Institute has been requested by the Government of Venezuela to provide consultative services in connection with the development and implementation of its scholarship program. Our Area Director for South America has made three visits there during the last seven weeks and will meet again with Venezuelan authorities during the week of September 16 (at the request and expense of the Venezuelan Government). An effort the size of this program would tax the capacity of most governments and it is of course particularly difficult to develop a crash program of this nature in the absence of any real experience or competence in such work. We expect to increase greatly our consultative activities in Venezuela.

(TRANSLATION)

June 15, 1974

Senor Wallace B. Edgerton
Presidente del Instituto of
International Education, Inc.
New York

I am pleased to inform you that the National Government has created a Scholarship Program designated as "Gran Mariscal de Ayacucho", with the purpose of training Venezuelan personnel at the level of technicians, undergraduate and graduate programs, in areas essential for the development of the country.

In this program, an as yet undetermined number of grantees, will go to the United States of America to pursue academic studies and, if necessary, to obtain training in the English language.

For this purpose, the National Government through the Central Office of Planning and Coordination, has decided to contract for the services of your Institute, to provide the fiscal management, placement and academic supervision of the students who go to the United States.

Since the signing of a contract of this type requires a series of internal legal procedures which make it impossible for Mr. John Thurston, officer of the Institute of International Education, Inc., to sign it at this moment, I would be very appreciative if you would consider this letter as a "Previous Agreement of Contract", so as to initiate negotiations to begin to carry out the activities required of the Institute as soon as possible.

As soon as the contract is duly drawn up and signed by the Venezuelan party, it will be sent to you for conclusion.

Thank you for cooperating with Venezuela in the success of this important program.

OFICINA CENTRAL DE COORDINACION
Y PLANIFICACION
—
MIRAFLORES

02/09

CT-

Caracas, 15 JUN. 1974

Señor
Wallace B. Edgerton
Presidente del
Institute of International Education, Inc.
Nueva York

Tengo el gusto de dirigirme a usted en la oportunidad de participarle que el Gobierno Nacional ha creado el Programa de Becas "Gran Mariscal de Ayacucho", con el fin de capacitar personal venezolano a nivel de técnicos, pre y post-grado, en áreas prioritarias para el desarrollo del país.

Dentro de este Programa, un número de becarios no determinado aún, irá a los Estados Unidos de América a realizar estu-dios académicos, y de ser necesario obtener preparación previa en el idioma inglés.

En tal sentido, el Gobierno Nacional a través de la Oficina Central de Coordinación y Planificación (CORDIPLAN), ha decidido contratar los servicios de ese Instituto, con el objeto de que se encargue del manejo administrativo, ubicación y control y seguimiento académico de los becarios que viajen a ese país.

Dado que la celebración de un contrato de este tipo requiere de una serie de trámites legales internos que hacen imposible su firma en momentos en que se encuentra en el país el Sr. John Thurston, funcionario del Institute of International Education Inc., mucho estimaré considere esta comunicación como un Acuerdo Previo de Contrato, a fin de iniciar las gestiones para empezar a ejecutar de inmediato las actividades requeridas al mencionado Instituto.

June 28, 1974

Memorandum for Dr. Martha Ramos - CORDIPLAN

From John L. Thurston

This memorandum will consist of brief descriptions of the various services IIE can perform in the broad area of Human Resource Development. It is written as a follow-up to some of our discussions in Caracas and it is also meant to be responsive to the points raised in Dr. Tieno's recent letter to the U.S. Ambassador in Caracas. (I shall omit reference to our services in connection with students, since these have already been discussed and are the subject of a contract between your government and IIE).

## RECRUITMENT OF PROFESSIONAL STAFF

The IIE is prepared to recruit individual experts in any field for service in Venezuela, for both long and short-term assignments. The Institute has had considerable experience in recruiting experts, from the United States and from other countries. For example we have recruited legal educators for the faculties of law schools, business management educators for university employment, agricultural experts to conduct research.

## ESTABLISHING AND MANAGING TRAINING INSTITUTES

Among the more significant projects administered abroad by IIE is one which may be of particular interest to you. From 1967 to 1971, we conducted a series of four to six week intensive training institutes in East Pakistan for college teachers of science and teachers of some of the practical technologies. To staff these institutes, we recruited over 50 senior U.S. university science and applied science teachers who devoted their summers to conducting these institutes which were held at the Universities of Dacca and Rajshahi. Over the four-year period, we instructed more than half of the entire body of science and technology educators in what is now Bangladesh. Similar programs could be developed in such fields as computer technology, and management decision-making.

To: Dr. Martha Ramos

## ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT SERVICES

The IIE can of course provide administrative support service for the staff it recruits, but it can also provide such support to non-Venezuelan staff which IIE does not recruit. Such support includes the handling of pay-rolls, transportation, dependents allowances, insurance and the like. We have provided such support to U.S. and other nationals working overseas in International Agricultural Research Centers, on projects sponsored by the Harvard University Development Advisory Service, and many technical assistance projects funded by the Ford Foundation in Asia, Africa and Latin America.

## INDUSTRY VISITS AND SKILL TRAINING PROGRAMS IN THE U.S.A.

There are opportunities for technical training in the U.S. apart from formal academic study. We have, in the past, placed a number of trainees, particularly at junior management and engineering levels, in industrial plants for periods of observation and on-the-job training. The plant setting frequently offers the best prospect for gaining experience and sharpening skills.

Alternatively, there are substantial opportunities for skills training within universities, in fields not ordinarily identified with the academic curriculum. We have, for example, a contract to train oil technicians from the Republic of Korea in a variety of highly specialized skills, and have found training facilities in institutions in the Southwest U.S. offering sub-engineering training programs.

The Institute is most favorably positioned to establish effective contact with U.S. industry. The direct business affiliations of many of IIE's Board of Trustees, its Corporate Relations Committee, as well as Board Members in its Regions throughout the U.S. offer potential access to many major U.S. firms. In all, we have established ties with over 200 U.S. companies, many of which participate in our programs and activities.

We, therefore, are able to arrange such visits as might facilitate specific training objectives, and are prepared to entertain a proposal that would ask IIE to provide, or seek out, opportunities for technical training, either in institutes or in American establishments.

(It should be recognized that the placing of non-employees in local industries often presents problem of some sensitivity and placement in any specific establishment can never be assured).

To: Dr. Martha Ramos

SHORT-TERM VISITS OF VENEZUELAN S TO THE U.S.A.

The IIE can arrange for short-term visits to the U.S.A. of from three weeks to three months duration or longer. For more than 20 years we have developed programs for scientists, educators, artists, engineers, physicians and others who sought to consult and exchange views with and to learn from individuals and organizations in the U.S.A. Our services include all essentials from logistical support to professional programming. We now manage such programs involving hundreds of visitors annually for U.S. foundations, the U.S. Government and international organizations. Our regional offices in the U.S.A. are used in this work to assure close and fruitful contacts between the visitors and the professional resources available throughout their countries.

SEMINARS AND WORKSHOPS

The IIE has had substantial experience in the planning, design and implementation of international workshops, seminars and conferences involving a wide range of areas and fields. These activities have served several purposes: to provide a means of communication among experts in important new fields such as the application of communications technology to educational planning; to develop guidelines for the expansion and strengthening of teaching and research in science, technology and business administration.

For more than ten years we have planned and managed seminars in Latin America, Asia, Africa and North America. Our services relate to seminars include all aspects, from such logistical support as housing arrangements to the identification of prospective international participants and the development of the agenda and preparation of final reports - all done in close coordination with sponsors of the seminars.

CONSULTATIVE SERVICES IN HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT AND MANPOWER UTILIZATION

The IIE can provide through its own staff, and through the employment of other professionals from various countries, a wide range of consultative services in the general field of Human Resource Development. These services could include consultations in several areas including; but not limited to:

- Student selection for scholarship assistance

- Student Orientation and language training

- Surveys of manpower requirements

To: Dr. Martha Ramos

Development of plans for meeting educational needs, including
technical institutes related to manpower requirements.

Training - within - industry programs

Job placement services

The costs of the forgoing services will of course vary according to
the service; the fees charged by IIE, as a not-for-profit, private
organization are related entirely to the cost of performing the service.

We shall be pleased to elaborate upon any of the services mentioned
above, and are prepared to do so by correspondence, telephone conversation,
or through personal visits if you wish to arrange for such visits.

Attachment: IIE Annual Report

STROOCK & STROOCK & LAVAN

Memorandum re: <u>Itinerary of RITA E. and GUSTAVE M. HAUSER</u>

Date September 5, 1974

To: Secretary Kissinger

From: Rita E. Hauser

I. Arrive Teheran - Monday, September 23rd, 9:30 P.M.
From Zurich - Iran Air Flight No. 724

Would appreciate cable to Amb. Helms as to visit as follows:

A) Mrs. Hauser invited by Iranian Government.

Meetings have been arranged with Minister of Higher Education and Minister of Planning. Mrs. Hauser hopes to get Iranian Government interested in funding large number of Iranian students on all levels for U.S. study, to be administered by Institute of International Education. (See attached invitation letter and I.I.E. Venezuelan project along similar lines.)

Mrs. Hauser is a former colleague of Princess Ashraf at the U.N. Human Rights Commission, and remains good friend of hers. She expects to see Princess in Iran unless she has already departed for U.N. General Assembly. Princess is Shah's twin sister.

B) Mr. Hauser is a general director of U.S. Overseas Private Investment Corp. He expects to see Minister of Planning and Minister of Finance on U.S. guarantees of American investment in Iran. Also will visit major industrial projects insured by O.P.I.C. to date.

C) Hausers would appreciate visit with Amb. Helms and Embassy staff.

D) Hotel reservations to be arranged by Iranian Government.

II. Arrive Tel Aviv - Wednesday, October 2nd, 12:25 A.M.
From Teheran - El Al Flight No. 132

Would appreciate Embassy assistance at airport.

Also notify Amb. Keating of visit. Mrs. Hauser is old political friend from New York and would appreciate visit with him.

Visits with Israeli officials have been arranged by Amb. Dinitz.

Staying at Tel Aviv Hilton.

Depart Sunday A.M. Oct. 6 for New York

RITA E. HAUSER

ATTORNEY AT LAW
61 BROADWAY
NEW YORK, N. Y. 10006
425-5200

April 28, 1975

Hon. Henry A. Kissinger
Secretary of State
Department of State
Washington, D.C.

Dear Henry:

I held the fort for you the other night at the Council on Foreign Relations, when Stanley Hoffman came to dinner. I hope you have the hatches buttoned down; this current storm about you will pass. Many of us still believe you are vital to the sound conduct of our foreign policy.

I want to ask you a small favor. The Shah of Iran is apparently coming to the United States on May 15th for a state visit. If possible, I'd appreciate an invitation to the White House dinner in his honor. As you know, I'm quite close to his twin sister, Princess Ashraf, and we spent three weeks in Iran last fall as guests of the Prime Minister. We are putting together a large student exchange program with Iran to be administered by the Institute of International Education, and it was this that I negotiated with the Prime Minister. I am also much involved in the forthcoming Symposium the Shah is sponsoring in Persepolis this September for American leaders, under the direction of the Aspen Institute.

You can always call on me for whatever help you may need. I remain your good friend as well as staunch supporter.

REH/ms

Confidential

Memorandum re:

To: Henry A. Kissinger

From: Rita E. Hauser

Date Dec. 30, 1974

Your proposal for the President to establish an independent review group to look into the charges that the CIA violated its constitutive legislative act strikes me as an excellent one, provided the membership is correct and can write a final report based on clear evidence and legislative intent, rather than polemics, and provided the members can resist the pressure of the press to find a scapegoat.

If the President acts on your suggestion, I would be interested in serving on the group. My qualities as a lawyer are self-evident, and, in addition, I would like to help see that a final report does not serve to injure your reputation. I believe this whole business will be very tricky as far as you're concerned, with many in Washington and in the press seeing this as an opportunity to "get you".

Please tear this note up after reading it.

* * *

I understand you met with the Executive Committee of our Panel studying the reorganization of the USIA, CU and VOA. I serve on the Panel as a member of the Advisory Commission on Educational Exchange (appointed by Nixon). We have had some very marked differences of opinion, particularly between Leonard Marks (our Commission chairman) and Frank Stanton, the Panel's ad hoc chairman as to VOA. I know well and like Frank very much, but cannot say I agree with him on this matter. We've discussed it alotted. I think it is important for you to get your

- 2 -

[1C]

views in as soon as possible, as we are in final
drafting stage. I understand the Murphy Commission
will defer to our suggestions, and I think the Hill
will also be inclined to put great weight in our
proposals, given the nature of the members on the
Panel and the fact that the matter has not been
reviewed for many years.

* * *

I hope you and Nancy had a good rest with
Nelson and Happy. We, too, were at our country
house, and I read Raymond Aron's latest book with
great pleasure.

Hope to see you soon. I'll be in D.C. on
January 20-21 for a final rewrite session of our
Panel's draft report. Perhaps we can get together
then, as I would like to discuss the above with
you personally.

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20036
1100 CONNECTICUT AVENUE, N. W
TELEPHONE (202) 293-1990
CABLE ADDRESS
PLASTROOCK - WASHINGTON, D. C

LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90017
707 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD
TELEPHONE (213) 629-2400
CABLE ADDRESS
PLASTROOCK - LOS ANGELES

PARIS 8*, FRANCE
18-20 PLACE DE LA MADELEINE
TELEPHONE 742-23-33
CABLE ADDRESS
PLASTROOCK - PARIS

December 1, 1975

Hon. Gerald R. Ford
President of the United States
Washington, D. C.

Dear Mr. President:

I want to thank you for your consideration of my name during your recent deliberations as to the Supreme Court. Your generous words about me, conveyed to the Vice-President and to Milton Hoffman (whom I just met through the good offices of my law partner, Max Rabb), were most appreciated. You made a fine choice, who will do well for the country.

I have been talking both to Jack Marsh and Bob Hartman as to a central campaign theme for 1976. "The Preservation of Liberty" strikes me as a good one, especially if New Left egalitarian thinking should be dominant in the Democrat's choice. I will sit down with Bob Goldwin to elaborate sub-themes. But I have been frank in telling Bob and Jack that I worry about the great apathy toward your campaign which now exists among Moderate Republicans - especially of my generation. This can be fatal in the big State primaries. I believe you need an infusion of vigor and fresh ideas from the 30-40'ish crowd of Moderates who dominate the urban

Hon. Gerald R. Ford

Page Two

December 1, 1975

centers, and I would be happy to help you in this effort.
Max Fisher and I worked splendidly in past efforts for
Nixon, and he can tell you of the excitement we generated
by a shrewd perception of the basic issues and a solid
ability to get the story across to the Press.

On another front: I had a long chat with
Henry Kissinger on Thanksgiving Day, particularly about
the Moynihan resignation threat. Having served at the
U.N. for over three years, I know the deep frustration
Pat feels on the job. But if we are there, the aim
must be to garner friends, to find common ground, not
to alienate. The Zionist Resolution was nothing at all
what Pat made it out to be; rather, it was a dress
rehearsal for a move to suspend Israel from the General
Assembly in the absence of progress toward peace in
the Middle East. And having just completed a year's
service on a special Brookings Institution Panel on
the Middle East, I know how slim are the prospects
for peace. When that vote comes, and a follow-up
one to undo the very resolution creating Israel in
1948, every vote will count.

In my view, all of next year must be directed
toward preparing for this event. At the same time,
American Jews must feel they have a friend at the U.N.,
who really knows what is at stake. The last time this
happened was during Arthur Goldberg's time, which
encompassed the 1967 war. Having a strong supporter of
Israel in the person of the U.S. Representative is
anticipated by the Arabs. I know the Egyptians and
Lebanese very well, and they fully expect this. But they
also want someone who can maintain the basic friendship
of others in the Third World and who strives for fairness
in his dealings.

With striking accuracy, Bayless Manning describes (January 1976 issue) the low regard the majority of Third World Nations, most of which are authoritarian, has for the United States today. He portrays equally well American idealism, some would say self-deception, which still persists as to the kinds of governments likely to come to power in these countries in the wake of decolonization.

After such telling perceptions, it is difficult to understand how he concludes that these very nations, in the not too distant future, will somehow find cause to prize individual liberties and, as he graphically puts it, rediscover "the banners for the next round of progressive change ... safe in Philadelphia."

I strongly doubt it. The coercive force of most of these authoritarian governments is so powerful and the corruptive elements so pervasive, that only a dreamer can foresee the possibility of an operative political system in which individual freedom might flourish

[LC]

- 2 -

in the vast number of these nations. A fortiori, in
the Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China
which Manning also foresees as nations whose citizenry
will be in hot pursuit of political rights. The
circumstances which produced the American constitutional
scheme limiting the powers of the central government
were unique and persisted for but a brief time in the
late 18th Century; they are certainly not replicated
today in most parts of the globe. Indeed, it is truly
remarkable that nearly two hundred years later most
Americans - but clearly not all - continue to hold dear
the institutions of government spawned by those
particular events. Numerous commentators now argue
that our devotion to individual liberties cannot persist
for long in the face of the post-industrial strains
with which we are all too familiar, and some even insist,
unpersuasively to me, that individual liberty is all
but dead in America today. Whatever the merit of this
position, the American situation differs profoundly
from that of the Third World.

- 3 -

Manning's major premise rests on the
assumption that these Third World nations have not
discovered our brand of individual rights because
America itself has failed to achieve equality for all
its people, particularly those of minority background.
But even if the United States did achieve fully the
equality of results which Manning would desire, and this
presumably without injury to liberty as we know it,
there is no reason to believe that this event, standing
alone, would make various Third World nations less
repressive or more freedom-loving. And, for that matter,
it cannot safely be said that these Third World countries,
in light of our great accomplishment, would then view
us positively and, therefore, once again, emulate our
better characteristics. Moreover, achieving full
equality while preserving liberty is a task of such
enormity that one can only marvel at Manning's unstated
assumption that it can in fact be accomplished.

Economic, political and social forces dominant
in the world today bode badly for the emergence of

[LC]

- 4 -

governments determined to protect individual rights
through restraints on the power of their leaders.
Hopefully, we in the United States shall persist in
our somewhat sporadic resistance to abuse of govern-
mental authority, relying, as we do, on the tenacity of
those called upon to defend constitutionalism on a
daily basis. But that fact alone cannot serve as an
adequate underpinning of our foreign policy toward
authoritarian regimes, as Manning suggests. If I am
right in my view that repression in most places will
breed further repression, and not the converse, the
United States does have hard choices to make in
response. It can opt to use its power and leverage
to ameliorate the effects of repression wherever
possible at a cost deemed tolerable to us in the given
circumstance. We can, after all, refuse to give
military aid to Chile in an effort to force that
government to cease torture and brutality of its
citizens. We can use the "weapon" of wheat to bargain
for emigration or religious rights for many Soviet

[LC]

- 5 -

citizens. We can make release of political prisoners
a condition for our recognition of the Castro Government.
And should it prove necessary once again, we can use
military force to destroy any totally criminal govern-
ment which might threaten the peace of much of the
world.

Being true to ourselves at home - a goal which
is correct in itself and to be pursued because it
responds to our historic and prized commitment to
liberty - will not solve the thorny problem of deciding
how to deal with authoritarian or repressive foreign
governments. Speaking out against them at the United
Nations and elsewhere is one option among many on the
scale; it, too, is not an end in itself. Manning
correctly avers that the question is not whether there
should be _some_ ideological component in foreign policy,
but whether that component should be greatly enlarged
or made predominant. But his article fails to answer
the question posed. The author unfortunately escapes
the problem by a wishful assertion that individual

- 6 -

liberties will be discovered anew in many Third World
nations, despite the obvious fact that historic forces
are leading most of these nations in just the opposite
direction. Whether the United States wishes to attempt
to stem the tide, and, if so, by what means, is the
issue to be debated lest our foreign policy be further
divorced from the intrinsic values we seek to perpetuate
in world affairs.

Rita E. Hauser

Former United States Representative
to the United Nations Commission
on Human Rights

COMMENT AND CORRESPONDENCE

To the Editor:

In his article in the January 1976 issue Bayless Manning describes, with striking accuracy, the low regard the majority of Third World nations, most of which are authoritarian, have for the United States today. He portrays equally well American idealism, some would say self-deception, which still persists as to the kinds of governments likely to come to power in these countries in the wake of decolonization.

After such telling perceptions, it is difficult to understand how he can conclude that these very nations, in the not too distant future, will somehow find cause to prize individual liberties and, as he graphically puts it, rediscover "the banners for the next round of progressive change . . . safe in Philadelphia."

I strongly doubt it. The coercive force of most of these authoritarian governments is so powerful and the corruptive elements so pervasive, that only a dreamer can foresee the possibility of an operative political system in which individual freedom might flourish in the vast number of them. Nor does this seem likely in the Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China, which Manning also foresees as nations whose citizenry will be in hot pursuit of political rights. The circumstances which produced the American constitutional scheme limiting the powers of the central government were unique and persisted for but a brief time in the late eighteenth century; they are certainly not replicated today in most parts of the globe. Indeed, it is truly remarkable that nearly 200 years later most Americans—though clearly not all—continue to hold dear the institutions of government spawned by those particular events. Numerous commentators now argue that our devotion to individual liberties cannot persist for long in the face of the post-industrial strains with which we are all too familiar, and some even insist that individual liberty is all but dead in America today. Whatever the merit of this position, the American situation differs profoundly from that of the Third World.

Manning's major premise rests on the assumption that these Third World nations have not discovered our brand of individual rights because America herself has failed to achieve equality for all her people, particularly those of minority background. But even if the United States did achieve fully the equality of results which Manning would desire, and this presumably without injury to liberty as we know it, there is no reason to believe that this event, standing alone, would make various Third World nations less repressive or more freedom-loving. And, for that matter, it cannot safely be said that these Third World countries, in light of our great accomplishment, would then view us positively and, therefore, once again, emulate our better characteristics. Moreover, achieving full equality while preserving liberty is a task of such enormity that one can only marvel at Manning's unstated assumption that it can in fact be accomplished.

Economic, political and social forces dominant in the world today bode badly for the emergence of governments determined to protect individual rights through restraints on the power of their leaders. Hopefully, we in the United States shall persist in our somewhat sporadic resistance to abuse of governmental authority, relying, as we do, on the tenacity of those called upon to defend constitutionalism on a daily basis. But that alone cannot serve as an adequate underpinning of our foreign policy toward authoritarian regimes, as Manning suggests. If I am right in my view that repression in most places will breed further repression, the United States does have hard choices to make in response. It can opt to use its power

COMMENT AND CORRESPONDENCE

and leverage to ameliorate the effects of repression wherever possible at a cost deemed tolerable to us in the given circumstance. We can, after all, refuse to give military aid to Chile in an effort to force that government to cease torture and brutality toward its citizens. We can use the "weapon" of wheat to bargain for emigration or religious rights for many Soviet citizens. We can make release of political prisoners a condition for our recognition of the Castro government. And should it prove necessary once again, we can use military force to destroy any totally criminal government which might threaten the peace of much of the world.

Being true to ourselves at home—a goal which is correct in itself and to be pursued because it responds to our historic and prized commitment to liberty—will not solve the thorny problem of deciding how to deal with authoritarian or repressive foreign governments. Speaking out against them at the United Nations and elsewhere is one option among many, though it, too, is not an end in itself. Manning correctly avers that the question is not whether there should be some ideological component in foreign policy, but whether that component should be greatly enlarged or made predominant. But his article fails to answer the question posed. The author unfortunately escapes the problem by a wishful assertion that individual liberties will be discovered anew in many Third World nations, despite the obvious fact that historic forces are leading most of these nations in just the opposite direction. Whether the United States wishes to attempt to stem the tide, and, if so, by what means, is the issue to be debated, lest our foreign policy be further divorced from the intrinsic values we seek to perpetuate in world affairs.

RITA E. HAUSER
Former U.S. Representative
to the U.N. Commission
on Human Rights

RITA E. HAUSER

**Partner:**
Stroock & Stroock & Lavan, Attorneys at Law
61 Broadway
New York, New York 10006
(212) 425-5200

**Born:** New York, N.Y., July 12, 1934

**Married:** 1956, to Gustave M. Hauser, President and Chief Operating Officer - Warner Cable Company

**Children:** Glen (12) and Patricia (11)

**Education:**

A.B., Hunter College, 1954, with highest honors

Doctorate in Political Economy, University of Strasbourg, France, 1955, with highest honors

LL.B., Harvard and New York University Law Schools, 1958, with honors

License en droit (French LL.B.), University of Paris Law Faculty, 1958, with highest honors

**Honorary Degrees:**

LL.D., University of Miami; Seton Hall University; D. of Letters, Finch College

**Public Positions:**

United States Representative to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, 1969-1972

Member, United States Delegation to the 24th United Nations General Assembly

Member, U.S. Advisory Committee on International Educational and Cultural Affairs (Appointed by President Nixon in December 1973 for a three-year term)

Member, Board of Higher Education of the City of New York (Appointed by Governor Wilson on January 1, 1974 for a five-year term)

Member, Commission on U.S.-Latin American Relations

[Lc]

**Professional Organizations:**

Member of the Bar, New York and District of Columbia

Member, Association of the Bar of the City of New York

Member of the American Bar Association (A.B.A.)

Standing Committee of World Order Under Law
Council of Section on Individual Rights and
Responsibilities (1970-1973)

Advisory Board - American Bar Association Journal

Member of Executive Committee, The American Society
of International Law

Member of the Executive Committee, Laywers Committee
for Civil Rights under Law

Director, American Foreign Law Association

Director, American Arbitration Association

Trustee, International Legal Center

Trustee, Legal Aid Society of New York

**Other Boards and Memberships:**

Director, First Empire Bank-New York

Member, Council on Foreign Relations

Trustee, Institute of International Education

Director, United Nations Association

Member, Phi Beta Kappa Associates of the United States

Director, N.A.A.C.P. Legal Defense Fund (1969-1973)

**Lectureships - Exchanges:**

Handmaker Lecturer, Louis Brandeis Lecture Series,
University of Louisville Law School, 1972

Lecturer on International Law, Naval War College, 1970

Intellectual Exchange Fellow, Japan, Summer 1973

Mitchell Lecturer in Law, SUNY at Buffalo Law School, 1974.

**Languages:**

Fluent in French and Spanish