-Caveat Lector-
[ The CIA asked University of California administrator Earl Clinton Bolton, who
was spending
some time at CIA headquarters, to suggest ideas on how to improve relations
between the
Agency and academia. ]
Academia 01, p.1
5 August 1968
MEMORANDUM FOR: [deleted]
SUBJECT: Agency-Academic Relations
This is an attempt to make some observations and suggestions about
Agency-academic relations. In doing so I am grateful for the stimulus
furnished by your outline. Although I believe I have addressed myself to most
of the questions you have raised I have done so in free form rather than by a
point by point consideration. I have also used "head notes" for purposes of
organization and in an attempt to highlight the crucial questions in the
subject.
Justifying an Agency-Academic Relationship: Let me stress at the outset
that I believe Agency-academic relations are for the most part very good.
Though I have no quantitative data to support such a conclusion my guess is
that 99% of the members of the academy would be willing to assist the
Agency if properly and skillfully approached, and that only a small fraction of
that other 1% would be angered by an invitation to assist or would attempt to
embarrass the Agency in any way.
However, on occasion when a university or an individual has acknowledged
any contact with the Agency there has been some outcry by a few vocal
members of the academic community.
In a later part of this paper I suggest "an affirmative program" designed to
improve the Agency's reputation in academic circles and thus decrease the
risks (costs) of association with the Agency. However, until either the passage
of time or an image bolstering plan changes the cliches of the moment an
educational institution or individual electing to assist the Agency may be on
the defensive.
In my view the best way to defend association with the Agency when such a
defense is necessary is:
1. By relating work for the Agency to one of the traditional functions of a
university; and
Academia 01, p.2
2. By basing the defense or rejoinder on long established academic
values.
The Functions of a University: There is almost universal agreement that
universities do (and properly should) engage in the following basic functions:
1. The preservation and transmission of knowledge to their constituency
(i.e. the so-called teaching function); and
2. The testing of that which is currently accepted as "truth" and the
discovery of new truth (i.e. the research function); and
3. The performance for society's benefit of those functions which can best
(or exclusively) be performed by a university (i.e. the public service
function)
Authorities will differ as to whether a sub-function e.g. the training of a
leadership elite to be innovative and responsive should be included under "1"
or "3" above, but there is little disagreement that what higher education is all
about is encompassed within these general goals.
The Agency should phrase its requests to academia in such a way that the
service being sought relates as clearly and directly as possible to one of these
traditional functions and when necessary the university and individual scholar
should explain involvement with the Agency as a contribution to one of these
proper academic goals. It should also be stressed that when an apologia is
necessary it can best be made: (1) by some distant academic who is not
under attack, (2) in a "respectable" publication of general circulation (e.g.
Harpers, Saturday Review, Vital Speeches, etc.), and (3) with full use of the
jargon of the academy (as illustrated below).
Traditional Mores of the Academic: Every profession develops a certain
ethical or philosophical penumbra which is more or less sacred and which
protects from attack the most vulnerable or least understood rites of that
profession. This body of doctrine usually develops by "common law" and is
subsequently codified. (Incidentally the codified dogma never precisely
articulates the full scope of the protective doctrines; hence there is sufficient
vagueness in the total traditions of the profession to provide a skillful
polemicist with formidable ammunition for defense.)
Academia 01, p.3
Two doctrines fiercely protected by the academy are "academic freedom" and
"privilege and tenure." The former is the absolute right of the scholar to
investigate any subject within his competence, in any lawful way, at any time.
The latter doctrine holds that a fully initiated member of the profession has
certain irrevocable privileges, including but not limited to, the right to
continue his association with the university until retirement without fear of
termination except for a very few egregious offenses.
When attacked for aiding the Agency the academic (or institution) should base
a rejoinder on these sacred doctrines. For example, a professor's right to
undertake classified research is unassailable if he stands on the ground of
academic freedom and his privileges as a scholar. And he should be reminded
that although his derogators may undertake a good deal of no loud rhetoric
they really cannot impair his tenure.
Contracts and Grants: I have discussed [several words deleted] the matter
of research arrangement between the Agency and academic world. Here are
some of my further ideas on the subject.
1. Shouldn't the Agency have an insulator such as Rand or IDA? Such
entities have quite good acceptance in academia, do excellent work and
provide real protection against "blow back." Such an independent
corporation should of course have a ringing name (e.g. Institute for a Free
Society), should do work for the entire intelligence community, and
should really have a sufficiently independent existence so that it can take
the heat on some projects if necessary.
2. In my opinion we are in a cycle in which we are moving away from
institutional involvement in classified contracts toward a time when no
classified research will be allowed on campus even by a professor acting
on his own. The Agency might want to try to anticipate this trend by
offering off-campus leased space to scholars doing work for the Agency.
Academia 01, p.4
3. The indirect cost rate which is allowed by BOB Circular A-21 is
regarded by academic people as being unfair to the university. This
"overhead" rate does not allow adequate recovery of actual hidden costs.
Your contracting officer ought to be encouraged to adjust the established
rate upward by a point or two as an incentive to institutions of higher
education to take work.
4. As a general rule contracts and grants should be made only in response
to proposals which "originate" with the principal investigator on the
campus. The real initiative might be with the Agency but the apparent or
record launching of the research should, wherever possible, emanate from
the campus.
5. (Here is a declaration against interest.) It seems to me that there are
few instances in which it is indispensable or even necessary to contract
with an academic entity rather than the principal investigator directly.
Therefore because of the increased complexity of the transaction of the
institution is involved I would suggest that virtually all of your contracts
and grants be made directly to the individual. Perhaps personal service
agreements could be used to replace traditional contracts and grants for
sponsored research.
6. Would it be possible to substitute some new designations for words
such as "classified," "secret," "confidential," etc? Perhaps labels such as
"limited access research," "not to be discussed with others without prior
permission of the Agency," etc. could be used. My point is that such
terms as classified research have become so emotionally charged that
they provoke an irrational response before substantive content is even
considered.
Academia 01, p.5
"The Image": An Affirmative Program: Good public relations means
excellent performance publicly appreciated. Because of the nature of the
Agency's work discussions about performance must be limited, and efforts to
gain public appreciation minimized. However I think it is possible to improve
acceptance among that "public" which is the academic world.
To accomplish such a result would require a positive, long-term public
relations plan. My impression is that the Agency has excellent press relations,
but is not affirmatively interested (probably intentionally) in overall public
relations. As to the academic community I would suggest that a very well
considered, affirmative public relations program be developed.
The evolution of a public relations plan follows well recognized steps. These
steps are suggested by the following questions.
1. How do we appear to the target group (academia) today?
2. How do we want to appear to that target group five years hence?
3. What steps should we take to get from phase 1 to 2?
It is of course unlikely that the goal in 3 above will just happen by accident;
the goal is obviously more likely to be reached if there is a plan.
It is difficult to suggest implementing techniques without first knowing the
precise future image the Agency would like to have in the academic world.
However, I believe the following suggestions would generally improve that
image among academicians.
1. Follow a plan of emphasizing that CIA is a member of the national
security community (rather than the intelligence community) and stress
the great number of other agencies with which the Agency is allied in
advancing national interests. Several such agencies (FBI, AEC, Secret
Service, State Department, etc.) have spent much time, money and
thought on telling their story. In my view the Agency will benefit by some
"transfer" effect.
Academia 01, p.6
2. Establish at Yale the Walter Bedell Smith or William J. Donovan
Lectures or Chair on Intelligence as an Instrument of National Policy. (Try
in as many ways as possible to establish the study of intelligence as a
legitimate and important field of inquiry for the academic scholar.)
3. Invite qualified and sympathetic scholars to take their sabbaticals at
the Agency. They would work not as consultants, for that is a very
different function, but on subjects and in a manner traditionally followed
by a professor on his sabbatical.
4. Permit a few carefully nominated and selected doctoral candidates to
spend a year at the Agency working on their dissertations. The
unclassified materials in the library are a rich source of materials for
genuine academic research. The candidate would of course have to
recognize the Agency's right to review the finished document for
accidental leaks.
5. Provide a handsomely funded post doctoral one-year opportunity for
selected scholars. (The John McCone Fellowships?)
6. Publicize any effort of the Agency to make scarce materials available to
scholars. (Could the story of the Hoover Institution -- Agency
arrangement be told by a distinguished scholar of Chinese affairs in a
publication of general interest to academics?)
7. Stress in recruiting, articles and speeches that the Agency is really a
university without students and not a training school for spies. There is as
much academic freedom within the walls of the building and among
those competent on a given subject as on any campus I know. (I haven't
detected the slightest tendency on the part of anyone to resist saying
what he thinks.)
Academia 01, p.7
8. Encourage Agency representatives who attend academic meetings to
clearly identify their affiliation.
9. Do all recruiting off campus and try to time these visits so that the
probability of reaction is decreased e.g. during the summer, between
semesters, after the last issue of the student paper is printed for the
semester, etc.
Back to home page
<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
<A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
