August 30, 1961

Dr. Fritz Kraemer
4319 Fessenden Street, N.W.
Washington, D. C.

Dear Kraemer:

Enclosed is some further material from our mutual friend Lorden. You will know better than I what to do with it.

I thought you might like to see what happened to
our friend Schlabrendorf.

I am mailing them to you, because if I bring them
they are apt to be left on an airplane or become National
Security Council documents. In the latter case I am sure
no one would know the difference.

Warm regards.

Enclosures/2 copy lorden 25. Aug., copy Tomorrow Aug. 18
Dictated by Mr. Kissinger but signed in his absence.

HARVARD UNIVERSITY

CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

ROBERT R. BOWIE, Director
HENRY A. KISSINGER,
EDWARD S. MASON
THOMAS C. SCHELLING

6 DIVINITY AVENUE
CAMBRIDGE 38
MASSACHUSETTS

August 30, 1961

Dear Kraemer:

Warm regards.

Enclosures/2

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

19 July 1961

Dear Henry

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

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

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

2

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

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

One of our most important courses has been the 1-13 course (the Dual Area one year course), which intended to give students a practical working knowledge of the base language, (German) and a target language (Russian, Czech, Hungarian, Polish or Serbo-Croatian), plus the necessary background in sociological, economic, political and military factors. It included intensive interrogation practice and other specialized phases, all considered essential for the efficient functioning of our military personnel in the different areas of this command.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Headquarters, United States Army Language School
Presidio of Monterey, California
Office of the Commandant

AMALS-CDT

9 August 1961

Colonel William R. Kintner
Office of the Chief of Staff
Department of the Army
Washington 25, D. C.

Dear Bill:

Thanks for your note of 3 August and I am delighted to hear
that you will continue to be in close touch with the military.

Concerning the Oberammergau operation, I have always felt
that in the language area it was a duplication of the US ALS function.
Given the mission, we can teach anything here that they can there
and, in addition, it leaves a man with an entire overseas tour to
devote to his operational assignment. Of course, in connection with
intelligence instruction overseas, it would be worthwhile to have
facilities (language laboratories, etc.) available to keep current in
the language, but this would not require an extensive teaching staff.

Concerning area background and idealogical training, these
are taught here to some extent at present; we are now increasing
them for Attache and MAAG personnel; and I expect to increase
them greatly in the not too distant future for all students.

With regard to pay scales, Mr. Lorden may be right, but I
don't think the differential is significant, especially as our instruc-
tors here are mainly in the GS-6 and GS-7 grades.

In the case of German, there may be some advantage to having
a short German course to take care of local needs. In the case of

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
OFFICE CHIEF OF STAFF
WASHINGTON

22 Nov 61

My dear Henry,

Attached please find the Lorden
papers. I am chagrined that I couldn't
actually do something about this matter.

God be with you.

As always,

KRAEMER

22 West 55th Street
New York 19, N.Y.

Judson 2-7030

August 18, 1961

Dear Henry:

The Lieutenant Governor, as requested, telephoned Herr von Schlabrandorf on Monday and our visitor was much pleased and comforted.

Enclosed is a memorandum from a member of the Governor's staff who was born in Vienna, lived in Berlin through 1956 (Army Intelligence I believe) and who is very much upset about the current situation. Would you mind giving me your opinion of his specifics?

Dr. Henry A. Kissinger
6 Divinity Avenue
Harvard University
Cambridge 36, Massachusetts

John A. Lorden
Oberammergau
Prussmanstr.11

25. August 1961

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

Dear Henry:

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

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

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

With the re-activation of so many reservists it would appear as mandatory, that our Combat Int. Courses should incorporate some subjects taught here: 1.e. European Topogr., Pol. Survey on Germ. & Sat.etc., to give them an inkling. Unfortunately also this is not being considered. The result is, that as the few remaining orientation-type courses come to an end, American instructors, with years of experience, also find themselves looking for new positions.

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

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

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

6 DIVINITY AVENUE
CAMBRIDGE 38, MASSACHUSETTS

November 10, 1961

Dr. Fritz Kraemer
4319 Fessenden Street NW
Washington, D.C.

My dear Kraemer:

I know this is buck-passing, but
I really don't know what to do for Lorden, so
I am enclosing his latest letter on the closing
of the language school at Oberammergau.

Kind regards.

John A. Lorden
Oberammergau
Prussmannstr. 11

26. Oct. 1961

Dear Henry:

It is the purpose of this letter to keep you informed. Our language instructors have left, with the exception of 6 Germans, and we too have received our RIF notices.

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

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

The reasons given for discontinuing our school are:

1. There is one language school in California.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Most sincerely

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE

WASHINGTON 25, D. C.

NOV 17 1961

MEMORANDUM FOR DR. FRITZ KRAEMER, DEPARTMENT OF
THE ARMY, OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF
STAFF, COORDINATION GROUP

SUBJECT: Oberammergau School

Your papers relating to the closing of the Oberammergau School have been reviewed. I have discussed this in detail with Colonel Howell, ACSI, and Dr. Allen. It appears at this late date, that little can be done to reinstitute the program. In addition to the reasons cited by Mr. Lorden for closing the school, reduction of funds appears to have been the deciding factor. Dr. Allen indicated that courses of instruction given at ALS is close to par with that at Oberammergau. The exception being the degree of depth that Oberammergau provides in area study. This, of course, must be taken at face value as I am certainly not in a position to evaluate.

I know you are well aware that the respective CINC has the authority to curtail or eliminate any activity in his command in order to remain within his budgetary ceiling. This appears to be the case here and to my knowledge a request for additional funds to support this specific activity was never made, at least formally through channels.

I sincerely regret that I am unable to assist further.

DAVID C. JOLLY
Colonel, U.S. Air Force
Office of the Assistant to
the Secretary of Defense

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF
WASHINGTON 25, D. C.

19 December 1961

Dr. Henry A. Kissinger
104 Fletcher Road
Belmont, Massachusetts

My Venerable Henry:

You must pardon me for approaching you in a most bureaucratic
fashion. But you may remember darkly that during your last stay
we discussed a visit by Colonel Heasty, from my office, and myself
to Cambridge in the month of February.

Since we are most eager to meet with you and since on the other
hand we want to make arrangements to go to some other institutions of
higher learning in New England on the same trip, there is a need for
making appointments and laying plans before you have disappeared into
the India of the aggressively peaceful Mr. Nehru.

Will you please look at your calendar and let me know what two-day
period in February would be least inconvenient from your point of view
for our visit.

The developments in Katanga, Laos, South Vietnam, Indonesia, Berlin, Santo Domingo and other places are such that any comments I might make would only burn the paper on which they were written.

To you, Ann and even the children, small as they may be, my whole-hearted official good wishes. (Britta and I hope to find the time for private good wishes before Christmas.)

Yours as of old,

F. G. A. KRAEMER

December 22, 1961

My venerated Kraemer:

I told you the other evening that
I would let you have the schedule for the Defense
Policy Seminar for next year immediately. This
means within seventy-two hours in my language.

At any rate, I am enclosing the
schedule. The Seminar meets on Wednesdays from
4 to 6 p.m.. You are welcome to attend any
session that fits into your schedule and that
seems of most interest to you. We generally have
a Seminar at the Center on Tuesday mornings at
10:30 until noon on defense matters which is
much smaller, but I am sure we would be happy
to have you. I would suggest that you pick any
Tuesday and Wednesday from February 20th through
March 28th.

Could you let my secretary know as
soon as possible which dates you prefer so that I
do not make any other plans for that time?

I look forward to seeing you then.
Warm regards as always.