|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOTICE As an electronic publication of the Truman Library, users should note that features of the original, hardcopy version of the oral history interview, such as pagination and indexing, could not be replicated for this online version of the Stanley Andrews transcript. RESTRICTIONS Opened 1981
[Top of the Page | Notices and Restrictions | Interview Transcript | List of Subjects Discussed]
Oral History Interview with
october 31, 1970 Richard D. McKinzie
ANDREWS: What became the Point IV concept started a long time before the Inaugural Address of 1949. It actually started for a different reason than we afterward contended. This was during Mr. Roosevelt's administration when we had the big drive for food and materials for defense - the defense support program. The Japs had overrun the Pacific and the Germans were overrunning Europe, and our raw materials were getting awfully thin. So the United States, in its support of Great Britain and all the rest of them, turned to Latin America--largely for hemp, cotton, oil, seeds, minerals, everything that Latin America produces. Nelson
Rockefeller was named coordinator of that program. That involved the whole business. Well, it was not very long until he discovered that sick people couldn't do very much mining of tin, and all that sort of thing. Uneducated people were even worse to deal with. Then, when the food began to get short, you soon discovered that you had to have food out of those countries too. So they organized what was then called the Institute of Inter-American Affairs (the I.I.A.A.). Nelson Rockefeller was made head of it. He set up the Institute with help--industrial help--as an educational program primarily to assist in this war effort. In the meantime, over in the Department of Agriculture, the State Department, through the Smith-Mundt fund, was asked to take on a bunch of technical assistance programs in Latin America to increase food production. These ran separate from the I.I.A.A. I was never quite pleased with that deal, but anyhow that was done. What actually happened was, the first thing you knew you were running two diametrically opposed, differently operated programs.
MCKINZIE: Even during the war? ANDREWS: Oh yes. And what happened was that in order to control the money and in order to really keep the stuff under control (I'm not criticizing it as such), we set up what they called the "Servicio." The Servicio implied a Latin American and an American, and an international staff that went right down through to the bottom. But the Americans had the money. Which meant that everything the Servicio did had to have the approval of the Americans. The result was that the Americans pretty well brushed aside anything that the Latins wanted and set up our programs, instead. They were good programs, and they made fine showplaces because you had it absolutely under control. You set up machinery stations, and potato warehouses and all sorts of things, and it looked good. On the other hand, the Department insisted on going a slow route in research and extension. And so we would research a subject and then try to train extension workers. Those two programs ran for about eight years and they
were small. I think around five or ten million dollars was all that went into Latin America. When Mr. Truman made his inaugural address, all that came about was that he had said that we had to do something for the underdeveloped countries, the countries that were becoming new nations. He told his speechwriting staff to dig something up on that. The speechwriters began to scurry around about what the hell to have. And they come over to Agriculture and they went over to IIAA and everything else. Ben Hardy on the IIAA public affairs staff made a proposal for technical aid that was inserted in the President's address. When he made it, the State Department was caught flatfooted. They didn't have the faintest idea in terms of a program or anything else. So the bureaucracy began to debate on what in the hell this all means, and who would run it. The rivalry was between USDA and IIAA to take over the show--that's the truth. In the meantime then the State Department turned over $150,000 to Charlie Brannan, Secretary of Agriculture, and
Brannan told me to get on a bicycle and go around the world and see what one could work up in terms of a pilot program to give some pattern when the big deal went into operation. So, I took off and the first place I stopped was in Egypt. I called on the Social Welfare Minister and the Agriculture Minister. Education in Egypt was under Social Welfare. My pitch was: "The United States is thinking about a program for the underdeveloped countries and what are the needs in your country that you think the United States might help you on? We had two big ideas. One, the Minister of Agriculture wanted to establish a state dairy farm--state demonstration dairy farm. They wanted to increase the production of milk in the Nile Delta and for good reason. And the other one was the Aswan Dam. They wanted to do something about that. I found out, first, that the Agriculture Minister wanted to make his big 1600 acre Nile Delta farm the dairy demonstration farm. This meant that we'd put the money in that thing to make his farm larger. I didn't buy that. But I
did take it down; we could only make note of the Aswan Dam. I went on to Thailand, and sat down with the same ministers, agriculture and education. I found some people in Thailand who had been educated in the United States. One, the Minister of Agriculture, was a graduate of Cornell. In those days and still to some extent you've got to go through a ritual. You come into town and make your presence known to the government and you say what you want. Well, they set you up an appointment at say 3 o'clock in the afternoon. You go in and then meet the minister. He claps his hands and a servant brings in tea and you drink tea. And you start to talk. You have a lot of pleasantries, talk about families and the world at large, and the first thing you know the time is gone. He says, "At 10 o'clock tomorrow." So you go back at 10 o'clock the next day. The same routine occurs, and you begin then to get around to maybe what you want to talk about. By the third day they begin to tell you what they want and you get down to the business of your mission.
Well, they were very modest. The Minister said, "We're very proud of our rice. Thirty years ago our rice won the blue ribbon at the Calgary Cereals Fair, but we have not infused any new varieties or anything into it. Our production is going down and we want some work on rice. We've got to have an agriculture education system. Our education here is classical, Buddhaism and this. And we want somebody to help us on creating maybe an agricultural college. In the beginning we want them to do some experimentation on fertilizer. We haven't been able to use fertilizer successfully on our rice." "Well," I said, "that's very modest; have you got any suggestions on the kinds of people you'd like to have?" He said, "Yes, we do. There are two people in the United States that know us and we know them and we'd sure like to have them." And I said, "Who are they?" "Well," he said, "they are Dr. Love and Dr. Pendleton of Cornell." Love was in China on a long assignment with Cornell, and Dr. Pendleton was a
missionary in China and worked with Thailand and he knows our people. "We think they're still at Cornell. They're both elderly people." In those days one could move. I wired Secretary Brannan that night and I said, "Contact Cornell, get ahold of Dr. Love and Dr. Pendleton and see if they can be jarred loose to come to Thailand immediately." Mr. Brannan got into action; Ross Moore at OPAR took the ball, got in touch with Cornell, and by golly, within two weeks they were out there. We had a hell of a time getting them by--Dr. Love was 72 years old and Dr. Pendleton was 63--because of their age. But they were very vigorous people. We had to get all kinds of exemptions. Dr. Love and Pendleton went out there and went to work. They started right now and started at the grassroots with young people, and I'11 not go into that business. Something really fine came out of that. Then I went up to Burma. And Burma at that time had just become free and sovereign with a new
government. The first cabinet meeting had met without the astrologer's advice; some guy threw a bomb and killed the cabinet. There was practically no cabinet left. U N was the Acting Prime Minister. I talked with them and again they were also very modest. They said, "We're a socialist state, but we do realize that the socialist state cannot do everything. And we're looking for some sort of a compromise between socialism and capitalism. We think the coop idea is good, so what we'd like to have is some people out here who could help us in setting up coops, particularly rural coops. I found in the Ministry of Agriculture a graduate of Wisconsin University; I found also that he had spent a year at Crowley, Louisiana studying rice production and marketing. So I said, "All right, we'll see what we can do and get you somebody." Next stop was the Philippines. The Philippines at that time had become independent. And I put the same story to them. "Well," they said, "we're new and we've been under the benign rule of you people all these years and we've followed American
methods and adopted many of your ways." And I said, "Well, what do you think?" "We believe we need an extension service, something like your extension service. And on top of that we have a very serious mosaic disease that's destroying our henequin fibers. Can you do something about that I said, "I'll see." Again I was able to act quickly. I got hold of USDA and a chap by the name of Hapler was sent out there who went to work with them getting an extension law through the legislature. And I got a guy from Cornell who was a world authority on mosaic disease and had him out there pronto. Four pilot programs were in being and were running rather quickly. At about this time legislation to legalize the Point IV program got through Congress. It just barely did squeak through. It had open opposition from Tom Connally, Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee. The State Department in theory was supposed to carry the ball on the
legislation. But Willard Thorp, State Department man, didn't have the faintest idea what it was all about. Finally in desperation, Brannan of Agriculture was asked to come before the House Ways and Means Committee and explain what this was all about. And I went along with Brannan and I was able to pick up after Brannan made his pitch. I explained some of the kinds of programs that the Philippines wanted. One Congressman said, "Well, my God," he says, "we've been having hearings here for two weeks and you're the first guy that has ever told us what the hell it is all about." MCKINZIE: Well, I was going to ask you when you made this pilot study, when you made this tour of Egypt and Burma and Thailand and Philippines, did you tell them at the time that there could be no industrial programs? Was that an issue? Underdeveloped countries, a lot of them, wanted to have steel mills and that sort of thing. ANDREWS: No, the only place an industry program hit us was in Egypt, the Aswan Dam. The Egyptians hit
us right hard on that. And the Thais wanted Dr. Pendleton to make some investigations on fertilizer with a view of maybe sometime establishing a plant. But that's all it was. And not a thing on any industrialization at this point. Maybe my initial contacts were too narrow. The State Department's high officials decided that they had to make at least four countries in Asia so-called strategic areas and entitled to a greater assistance than the Point IV program visualized. This would to some extent include industrialization, and rebuilding of roads and harbors and war reconstruction. The Griffin mission involved a newspaper publisher from California who was sent out with Sam Hayes of the State Department, along with a bunch of other people. They went around Asia. They picked Burma, the Philippines, Thailand, and Indonesia as the so-called special treatment countries which would be a Marshall plan type of infusion of capital, rather than the so-called technical assistance. They took us out of those countries and the other little programs. In Thailand the original
agriculture programs went right ahead though. Old Dr. Love stayed there for, I guess eight or ten years. He created a miracle there; it's just fantastic. And Dr. Pendleton remained six years. Then that left Point IV with about forty countries. We finally got an appropriation through and then began the fight about who was going to run it and how. Willard Thorp normally was a fellow who would be the overseer in State. Les Wheeler, who used to be in OFAR, was his assistant and was in charge of the actual Point IV coordination. Les didn't get anywhere. The war between IIAA, USDA and the Marshall plan brought on a lot of confusions. There was a virtual stalemate. Finally, President Truman called in an ambassador from Guatamala, I forgot his name, and he tried to develop some agricultural programs. The bureaucratic struggle had him dizzy morning, noon, and night. This ambassador resigned. President Truman appointed Dr. Henry Bennett, of Oklahoma State University, to the job of real administration, to head the Point IV program as an independent unit in State. We'd
gotten the legislation through and had set up the Technical Cooperation Administration. Dr. Bennett was a very simple fellow and a very plain guy. He could handle Congress and he could handle almost anybody. He was to some extent scared of this deal because there was pressure all the time for more and more money. Some of the State Department people wanted to pour in a lot of money as did the Marshall plan people. It was finally then decided to consolidate military, Point IV and Marshall plan under Harriman, as head of the Mutual Security Administration--combining three agencies. In the meantime the struggle over methods continued between the USDA and the IIAA on the concept of how we would operate. Then we had the war on between the Technical Cooperation Administration and the Economic Cooperation Administration or the Marshall plan boys. ECA had set up an organization chart to handle TCA through the Marshall plan administration. That was another battle and Dr. Bennett was having one hell of a time.
I had worked with Dr. Bennett for twenty years and I was head of OFAR at the time. He often came over in the Department of Agriculture, and tried to work out things, and almost every afternoon he'd call me up and say, "Stanley, how'd you like to have some coffee?" And I said, "Well, I'd like to have some coffee." He said, "Meet me at the roof of the Washington Hotel." I'd go over there and we'd sit until sunset really trying to figure out how we could work a program out of all the mess. MCKINZIE: This was after they had passed the authorization for the TCA, but before they actually had anything going in the field. Had a little bit of money, authorization, but no program. .ANDREWS: In the meantime we began to send out groups of people, about three or four, to various countries and they would do what I tried to do on my original trip, find out what each country felt it needed.
For instance they sat down with the King of Saudi Arabia, and said, "Now, sir, what do you think that might work out here?" Most of the original Point IV programs were promulgated and were actually developed that way. When the appropriations came through, the ambassadors were given the leeway to make representations that this sort of aid was available to these countries. The ambassadors seeing that maybe this would make some political hay, sometimes oversold Point IV and made us a lot of trouble. They made a lot of promises which we couldn't carry out. Anyhow, that was the way the thing was done. The organization that was finally put together was made up of castoffs from the other bureaus. Dr. Bennett was about the only new guy in it. The rest of them were the Interior Department, Agriculture Department, the Treasury, the Budget Bureau and Public Health. In some cases the Department dumped their surplus over to us. I was still in the Department of Agriculture, where a portion of the Latin American program was
administered. We finally got a little organization; I think it had less than 300 people set up. And so Doc said, "Well, Stanley, we've got a lot of stuff here on paper, but what have we got in the field?" "Well," I said, "I don't know." "This authorization has given us 50 million dollars for India. I don't know how to spend 50 million dollars. I believe you know how to spend it. So, I want you to take a minister's rank and go to India and administer the Indian program." "Well," I said, "damn it Doc, I have been three years and nine months in Military Government. I've been away from my family and I think I've done my share." He said, "This is something pretty big." I said, "Unless I'm ordered, I'11 not go. On top of that, I don't want any damned minister's rank." He said, "Stanley, you need that." I said, "Hell, I was a lieutenant colonel in Military Government; I could outtalk General Clay and
I can outtalk these ambassadors." "You know," he said, "I want you to have elbow room. Now you know John Tolbert out in Oklahoma. old John is a great poker player and he chaws a lot of tobacco. I was over at Oklahoma City one morning about sunup and walking along the street and old John came out of the Skirnin Hotel. He just looked like he'd been drug through a sewer--and I said, 'John, what in the hell has happened to you?' He had tobacco spit all over his pants and all over the front of his shirt. He was just a terrible mess. "Well," he says, "You know, Henry, I like to play a little poker. I come in here last night and the boys they kinda laid for me; we played poker all night. This was so damn tough I couldn't turn my head to spit. And," Doc said, "I want you to have a rank where you can turn your head and spit." At that time I had been assigned as head of the delegation to the FAO meeting in Rome and Doc Bennett said, "I'm going to go out, see what we've got in terms of program."
I said, "Well, let's meet in Rome. I'm going to be in Rome (I had to go over there for a couple of weeks ahead of the PAO meeting) to a World Food Council meeting." Doc and his top staff, Ben Hardy and the five or six others flew into Rome. We got Doc before the PAO, got him on CBS radio. He knocked them over; he really went to town, with a simple direct statement on what Point IV hoped to accomplish. We also got Dean Acheson before the session. At that time Acheson made one of these famous off-the-cuff speeches, "There's no politics in food, and I would welcome the Eastern European people to take part in PAO." That was quite sensational at the time. Dr. Bennett wanted me to go with him on this trip. I told him in the first place I had been sitting here for two weeks listening to people talk and I'm so damned tired of doubletalk that I want to go home to kick a clod, if nothing else. I just don't want to go along." He said, "Meet me over at the Grand Hotel in the morning for breakfast." He was going to
take off that afternoon. So we went up to breakfast, and he again brought up the trip around the Mideast. I said, "There are several reasons why I won't go. One is what I told you yesterday; I'm so tired of this sort of business that I just got to get out and kind of get squared out and earthy again. And the other is that you ride on most any damn old plane that will run. And I just don't like to ride the kind of planes you like to ride." He had ridden a plane earlier from Ethiopia over an hour to Jordan, one of these Cessna jobs where the pilot had to put gas in it as they flew in the air. And I said, "I just don't ride that kind of an outfit." "Well," Doc said, "Stanley, you know when a fellow's time comes you're going to go anyhow." I said, "Yeah, that's right Doc, but he might call you when I was not ready." We parted on that note. His party took off with their final stop in Beirut, Lebanon. Then over to Jordan and ending up in Iran. He took off in a plane out of Iran, a DC-4 with a pilot who had never been checked out on a night landing. There weren't any instruments
at the Teheran airport; there was equipment there, but there wasn't a man in Iran that could run it. They arrived in a snowstorm and on a turn into the runway it crashed. The whole party died right there. Everything that Doc Bennett had promised or developed, in these countries that he had met up to then, died with him. There wasn't a record or anything. Just some sketchy stuff that some of the fellows had sent in to Washington without any idea of a report. This happened at Christmastime and I was down in Arkansas hunting ducks; I always go down there every year until recently to hunt ducks. I got a telephone call from Mr. Brannan. He said, "Get in here as quick as you can. The State Department wants to see you. There are some things going on here that I want to check you on." I said, "I'll drive in just as quick as we can." On arrival I went in to see Brannan. The State Department wants to borrow you to handle Point IV until they get an administrator. I went
over to State and into the office of James Webb, Under Secretary of State. His pitch was simple. The death of Dr. Bennett and his immediate staff had thrown the whole program out of gear. Not only was there confusion in the field on just what the situation was but State was preparing to go before Congress for its next appropriation and very little was known just what the congressional presentation would involve. Jonathan Bingham had just come in as deputy to Dr. Bennett but he had hardly gotten settled in his chair. Dr. Bennett had left a memo instructing the staff to prepare a budget for a rather simple and slow moving program modestly financed to support the prospective projects that had been set up in some 29 countries. Since I had worked with Dr. Bennett on the development of the overall concept of what Point IV would do I was requested to go out and pick up where he left off and make a general survey of the situation in each of these countries in preparation for the hearings that were to soon begin on the 1953 fiscal budget.
In a matter of hours I was on the way with Dale Clark, one of the assistants in the Middle East division of the then Point IV organization set-up. Since none of the promises or comments of Dr. Bennett's visit to the first three countries in the Middle East had been sent to Washington, I started with his first stop out of Rome--Lebanon. On arrival in Lebanon I was greeted with quite a display of protocol. Our Ambassador was out with greetings and transportation--several Lebanese officials were at the red carpet greeting at the airport. We were whisked to the Embassy where we were briefed on the situation and given our itinerary for meeting the various ministers and officials in Lebanon. This turned out to be a rat race. From about 4 in the afternoon until 10 o'clock at night we met variously with the President of Lebanon, the speaker of the house of representatives, the Vice President, the Minister of Reconstruction, the Minister of Agriculture, the Prime Ministers and a host of others, it seemed, in never ending rounds of fleeting contacts.
In each meeting the Mideast protocol was followed. After greeting and sitting down at a table, that black syrupy Arabian coffee was served--sometimes with a lemon rind tea as a chaser. Before the evening was over I was literally groggy and thankful that the Arabs as a rule do not serve or drink alcoholic beverages. On the following day we began serious discussions with the technical ministers on what they felt Point IV might do in Lebanon and particularly what Dr. Bennett had promised or told them. There was something of a different version of what Dr. Bennett had said among the various groups, but when asked what Dr. Bennett promised, we got the reply, "He told us that he was going to try to help us on the Litani." I said, "What is the Litani?" South of Beirut, the Litani River rises in Mt. Hermon, a snow-capped mountain section. For 5,000 years it has flowed down through a limestone gorge very much like the Grand Canyon except not as large, onto the Balbec Plain, where the Romans used to have the great bread basket. "We want to build a
dam to hold the water for irrigation," they said. I said, "What's this dam going to cost?" They said, "It's estimated it will cost 30 million dollars." I took that one under note and then I said, "Anything else?" "We want to pipe water up to a residential and a tourist section up on the side of Mount Hermon. It's fine ski slopes. We want to build a road and install a water system up there." I said, "What's that going to cost?" "'It will cost 6 million." Finally when we got around to the final conference, I had to tell them, "In the first place, we don't have that kind of money. We only got less than a hundred million for all of the Mideast and Asia." I advised the Lebanese group, the Minister of Construction, the Minister of Agriculture, the Minister of Social Welfare, that our program didn't visualize financing development projects of a resort nature at that time, and we didn't have 30 million dollars
to put into Litani. What I could do, I could allocate on the spot the necessary money to make a study of this gorge and to conduct borings to find out whether a dam would hold if it was put here. We might also develop the necessary economic and engineering studies to see whether the development were feasible. They said, "How quick can you do that?" I said, "I'll have people out here in two weeks." I allocated on the spot 800 thousand dollars and wired the Department of Interior to send their water, irrigation and dam construction engineers out there. It was a good psychological thing. When the U.S. engineer and survey group arrived we put them in tents right on that gorge. The people could see that. The group developed three things. One, what is the nature of the base? Will it hold water or will it break out into limestone caverns? Second, where should it be located? Third, the flow. How much water flows in it and what, how much will it irrigate? Finally the
economic feasibility of using the water that flows out of the dam for electric power was studied. It took this group two years to do it, but when you had that done you had a complete picture to lay before any banker or finance agency for credit. It was placed before the International Bank. The International Bank informally estimated they could loan around 35 million dollars on that deal. I made a U.S. commitment, "We will try to put in the sweetener if you have to have a little more money, but we want you people to put in some money." They didn't know whether they could do that or not. There was opposition from the French. The French owned the power monopoly. And they controlled the power into Lebanon and all the cities. They were afraid this dam producing power would knock them out of business. It got into the Parliament--quite a fight about it. This project was moving forward in a very effective way when the Eisenhower administration came in. And Mr. Stassen fired the country
directors in all of the Middle East countries. The project floundered for years and years. We didn't put anymore money into it. It was finally picked up by the World Bank and in the meantime the Lebanese got excited about it and put 20 million of their own money in it. To make a long story short, just five years ago the first water went through the dam and down to the Balbec Plain. The water flows through a conduit under the mountain and over into another part of Lebanon. The Litani project is a showplace as well as a great economic resource. It's now a big deal. It was started with nothing except the feasibility idea. Getting back now to where we were with these surveys. The purpose of these surveys was to fix up a program we could justify the appropriations upon. Still nobody was settled on what we were trying to do. There was still the fight with IIAA on the Servicio technique. There was still the fight with Marshall plan people. They wanted to take over. When the Mutual Security Act was originally introduced in
Congress, it made a broad sweep about foreign aid, but did not even mention Point IV. And so Dr. Bennett came to me and said, "My God, Stanley, we're out. Without a title designating the Technical Cooperation Administration as a part of this bill, we haven't got anything; we're gone and the Marshall plan takes over. The boys made a pretty shrewd move there on the bill." [Mutual Security Act set up three separate programs--TCA, Marshall plan and Military Aid under a director of Mutual Security--Mr. Harriman became the director. It was non-administrative but with authority to shift funds between the various agencies on proper justification.] I said, "What do you want Doc?" He said, "We've got to have a title in that bill," I said, "Well, will you fix up the title you want and I'11 go over to Senator Fulbright and talk to him about it." We fixed up a title to be inserted in the bill and I went over to Senator Fulbright and told him the same. "I don't know if you know it or not, but this bill that's before your committee doesn't even have Dr. Bennett's organization or program in it at all. It's completely out." He said, "I didn't know that." He asked that we fix up a title to be inserted. "I took my piece of paper out of my pocket, and handed it to him. He put it in his pocket,
and went over that afternoon to the Foreign Relations Committee and inserted this new language, and Point IV was born. That's just how close we came to getting left out." After that was done we did have a title, and a right to exist and a mission to perform. How are you going to perform it? Lot of people in the State Department and the people almost to a man, in the Marshall plan, felt that the only way to do this was to infuse massive amounts of capital. Dr. Bennett argued that you couldn't, that the countries couldn't spend the money even if they had it and do it wisely. And so it eventually worked down with the 100 million dollar appropriation, and our program was going to be on the basis of an attack at the grass-root level on the three basic needs of mankind; food, health and education. In the industrial area we could put up capital for demonstration processing plants and not major development. We did put a lot of small demonstration plants in. So that's where we started and we were looking for a name all the time.
And finally Delia Kuhn, who was our public affairs girl in Dr. Bennett's office said, "let's call it Point IV because this is Mr. Truman's deal." That's where the Point IV business came in. Technical Cooperation Administration was the legal name, but it went by Point IV. Still the issue wasn't settled. You had people in the State Department that were pressing all the time for more and more money and for more and more of what I call building shit houses that you can see instead of slow educational patient work. It got so bad the whole State Department and the Marshall plan and Point IV were so mixed up, we had to make some resolution, so we went to Mr. Truman at the White House and asked him to give us some guidance. MCKINZIE: Who's we? ANDREWS: Well, Dr. Bennett was the real boss. I had known and worked with him on rural problems when he was at Oklahoma State and I was a farm editor in Arkansas for twenty years. Since the major
agricultural programs in Latin America were being handled by USDA through the OFAR which I headed I sat in with him on many sessions trying to work out some sort of a program which could be carried out with our resources and which would meet the approval of the American people. As in all bureaucratic wrangles, and Point IV was no exception, save possibly it went on longer than some of the others, somebody, some time has to crack the whip. Mr. Truman had directed the State Department to call in representatives of other relevant agencies, Agriculture, Public Health, Interior, Commerce and bureaus in Commerce to work out a program. It was quite a conglomeration and most management people argued that any system based on such a wide variety of interests was bound to fail. Since nobody seemed to know just what was involved in the final hammering out of what we were to do, it was mutually agreed that we should go to the White House and present the various views. This was done before Mr. Truman in the Cabinet Room. State Department, Marshall plan and others all had
their say on what kind of a program we should undertake in this new venture. Dr. Bennett made his presentation last. Armed with a sheaf of telegrams and letters from church organizations, country bankers, educational groups and farm organizations, he turned to the globe which Mr. Truman always had around his office and the Cabinet Room and briefly sketched out what he thought were the greatest needs of the new nations at that time emerging in the world as the outcome of World War II. He had been to Ethiopia in the summer before he was appointed administrator and had looked over the marvelous natural resources of that African nation, steeped in poverty, disease and hunger. He argued quite persuasively what a down-to-earth program might do to lift the living standards of the people of that country with the assertion that about two-thirds of the population of the world were living in the same conditions and that they had to be given some hope if free government were to survive. He coined a rather telling phrase which stuck around for quite awhile. "These people," he said, "must have a chance to at least
glance into the door of the Twentieth Century." Mr. Truman turned to the group and said simply, "That's the kind of a program I was talking about." So that was that and we went away and began to build on that principle. The only main exceptions to this was a system of studies of possible resource developments which if carried out would contribute to the welfare of the people of these underdeveloped countries. These included the Aswan Dam project in Egypt, the development of the Jordan River in the Middle East, several big irrigation and development projects in India, a tube well program in the Ganges basin and the desalting of the Indus basin in Pakistan where more than 100,000 acres of alluvial land were lost annually. All of these got underway with studies by technical people from the United States. All of them have in the years since been developed into major and viable projects in varying degrees. The system followed was very similar to our description of the Litani project described earlier in this interview. Probably the most dramatic of all the studies and recommendations was the Jordan River
scheme, designed mainly to use all of the waters of the Jordan River for the benefit of all the people along its banks in the Middle East. That project never did get underway in totality but parts of it have been implemented both in Israel and Jordan. President Eisenhower gets the credit for that, because Eric Johnston, who made the first tour out there for Mr. Truman, made the second tour for Eisenhower and got all the publicity. Point IV put up $300,000 to a Massachusetts engineering firm that drafted broad plans for the Tennessee Valley Authority. They made the study and drafted the Jordan River scheme. The idea was to use the waters of the Jordan for all the people out there. It was divided up; the Yarmak water would go into Jordan and certain water out of the Galilee would go to Israel. As you recall, there was a revolution in Egypt and General Naguib became the boss there. The first mission that Johnston went around on he got the technical approval of the Egyptians, the
Syrians, the Jordanians, the Israelis, everybody in the Jordan basin. The technicians agreed the scheme was feasible and ought to be done. It had to be sold politically. Israel was a little hesitant but they said, "We'll go along with it." In Egypt, Naguib said, "I've got a revolution on my hands and if you'll just give me a few months here to get this revolution settled then we'll think about what we can do on that scheme. We'll also talk about the Gaza Strip and resettling the refugees." Naguib was in office only a short time. Nassar and his colonels threw him out. In the meantime then we were on good terms with Egypt and they were still pressing us for the Aswan Dam. We asked, "What do you know about the structure; what do you know about the gorge? I mean this is an international thing. You're going to flood a lot of Sudan, you're going to flood a lot of Ethiopia. What do these countries say? And how far up? If the dam is high how far back are you going to back this water up?" They did not have the answers.
We flew out to the proposed dam site and had a big session with all Egyptian members concerned. I told them, "I can't commit the United States for a lot of money, but I can commit enough money to make an aerial survey of the Nile gorge up to Lake Victoria, and maybe begin basic emergency studies." We got a Houston. firm almost overnight and they were in there making that aerial survey in short order. I went back through Egypt on another mission for FAO. The ministers found out I was in town. So, I went to the Sphinx Club with our ambassador and other Embassy people. They came and pulled me out of the Sphinx Club. One said, "Listen, what are you going to do about the Aswan Dam?" He said, "We have the gorge survey finished; what are you going to do on the rest of it?" "Well," I said (at this time the Eisenhower administration had come in and I was a holdover), I said, "I can't do much, because I can't commit this administration. But I'll tell you what I
will do. I have a commitment to the new administration that I'll carry the Point IV appropriation through the Congress. If I do that I'll see that 20 million dollars is in the appropriation that'll help you build the beginning of the bypasses after you have completed the borings for the site location." Well, they were pleased. I was on very good terms with the Egyptians and the whole civilian bureaucracy, many of whom had been educated in the United States. I came back then to the United States and reported to Mr. Dulles. And I said, "Mr. Dulles, I haven't firmly committed you or the United States to a program on the Aswan Dam. But I did promise the Egyptians that 20 million dollars in this appropriation bill will be earmarked for further studies and bypasses on the Aswan Dam." Well, you'd of thought he was going to give me a medal. He thought this was a wonderful job and commended me highly. I went through the congressional hearings.
The bill in Congress was passed and the 20 million dollars for Egypt were in the bill. I was on a good relationship with the Egyptian ambassador in Washington and every time I'd met him, he would call and ask about the 20 million. "What's happened? I can't get anybody to talk to me about that 20 million dollars. They just stall and stall." Shortly after that Dulles and Stassen went out with that gold-plated pistol for Nasser. This in the Egyptian culture was an invitation for him to commit suicide. After this Under Secretary of State Hoover went on to Britain and something happened. Nobody knows; some day maybe it will come out. At that time, Nasser was trying to get the British out of Egypt. We were sympathetic with him on it. At the same time the Abadan Oil Consortium was in real trouble under Mossadegh out in Iran. Somewhere between Egypt and London, somebody decided to make it pretty tough on the Egyptians kicking the British out. The British let the U.S. oil companies in the consortium, and our
CIA helped overthrow Mossadegh. The Union Oil Company, Mr. Hoover's company, got into that consortium. I'm not saying it was a scheme but that's what happened anyhow. The Egyptians never could get Dulles to move on this 20 million. The Egyptians invited the Russians to come in. The Russians put out a big lot of noise about the technical assistance to Egypt. And that's when Shepelev came out and went down to the mouth of the Nile. This got headlines in the New York Times. And I was in Washington at the time eating lunch with one of the ICA bureaucrats. And I said, "Looks like the Russians are stealing the march on the administration on this." And I said, "Did you ever see the survey of the Aswan Dam gorge?" He said, "No, I never heard of it." I said, "Well, Point IV paid a Houston, Texas air photograph firm $200,000 to make pictures of the gorge all the way up to Lake Victoria in
Ethiopia, and that survey in great detail is somewhere in the files. This survey was the preliminary work which we had agreed to do so that the engineers in Egypt and whoever else was involved would have this basic data to work on in terms of how high the dam might be and where it might be best located. The low level dam at Aswan, largely an irrigation impoundment for holding back a minimum of the Nile flood waters, was generally thought of as the proper place. Engineers later determined that the base of the flood dam was not a sufficient base for the proposed high dam. Point IV had agreed to help the Egyptians on the basic design and planning of the dam. There was a great deal of informal discussion and projections on how the whole scheme would be financed. Egyptians would provide the labor and the local costs. The Germans would put the machinery in and take cotton for twenty years to pay for it. The International Bank would loan 350 million dollars. The whole thing blew up when the Russians took over. We eventually got 4,000 technicians out
to various countries, in Agriculture, Public Health, Education and a few industrial arts craftsmen in 38 countries and coop people. And we were running along pretty well. We were quite popular with Congress. Congress always gave me more money than we asked for. So, came '53, why, Congress decided Point IV ought to have Burma and Indonesia under our wing. MCKINZIE: What was the basis for that, do you have any idea? ANDREWS: Well, they thought we were doing a better job. Also Point IV was a cheaper operation. That's perfectly honest. This Point IV idea to some extent was a white knight business. This was doing something for people. It was an antidote to war. MCKINZIE: Well, ECA said they were doing the same thing. ANDREWS: Right, but they didn't, that's the point. They poured their money into big breweries--and nothing wrong with it--light plants, and flour
mills and mines and timber. There's nothing wrong with it, but it missed the people completely. We were trying to move millions of people half an inch, rather than moving a few clear through the ceiling. That was the idea. MCKINZIE: I don't know whether this is a point to interject this. The State Department was never very interested in an operational agency within the State Department, were they? ANDREWS: No. What happened is, they just let me run it. Dean Acheson says, "Well, Stanley, you know about these damned country boys and the pie in the sky that you're peddling. You go ahead." He backed me up, as for example, when the Congress said Point IV should take over Burma and Indonesia. I was absolutely resolved that I was not going to have the bureaucratic squabble on the transfer from one U.S. agency to the other. The ECA was putting about 20 million dollars a year in Burma and about 30 million a year in Indonesia plus a hundred million dollar loan. Point IV had less
than a million dollars for either one of those countries. It was going to be some shock to have to tell these people of this fund cut. I went out first to Burma and called in Burmese and talked to U Nu, the Prime Minister, and his advisors. I said, "Now, this may seem unusual to you, but the Congress has transferred this program out of the ECA into another agency which does not have much money, but has a purpose of technical assistance with small amounts of money. It's a question in my mind whether you even want to continue it or not. The most we can give is probably a million dollar program which would be mostly technical assistance." U Nu said, "Well, we had more or less anticipated that even great America would find a time when it would have to cut down on its money. We have been very fortunate in selling our rice this year and we have 100 million of money that we can put into the programs and carry them on. You tell your President that we need your technical help far more than we need your money."
That really set things off in good shape and, of course, ECA had taken over a five story building there and each morning thirty cars, from Cadillacs to Fords, with a driver inside brought the office force to work. The first thing I did, I cancelled the whole damn business. When you got to a party, a reception, there'd be thirty ECA cars with a Burmese driver and the Burmese were all on bicycles. They didn't have such things as a car at that time. We cut down our own bureaucracy to the bone. I went on down to Indonesia and I found in Indonesia we'd been operating two years in Indonesia without an agreement on what we were supposed to do. We had put about 16 to 18 million dollars in there plus a 100 million loan. The Indonesians hadn't used any of the hundred million and I wanted to find out why. In the first place there was just no agreement on what we were to do. The ambassador was pushing them trying to get something, but nothing was moving. And so I said, "All right, Mr. Ambassador, I want to talk to the Cabinet." And
of course this was right after they'd had their sovereignty you know. These fellows looked like a high school cabinet, but sharp fellows. The Dutch had all left; 4,000 Dutch technicians had just walked right out of the country. The Ambassador came in and Sukarno was the President at the time and he introduced me and said, "This man is from Washington and wants to talk about your aid program." "Well, gentlemen, we're coming under another type of agency which your people will probably not be very happy about, because we've got a minimum amount of money to spend and you've been spending considerable money here. The first is whether you want to go ahead with any program or not; and second, I've been told by my government that we will fulfill to the letter every single commitment that has been made by an American. But from this hour on there will be no more commitments until we agree on what we're supposed to do." Well, the Ambassador like to fell out of the chair. The Cabinet, they whispered around the table, finally
saying, "You'd better come back tomorrow." We went back the next day and after a lot of talking, we actually got an agreement and it was signed. The program went on in Indonesia. I thought maybe I'd played hell, but I checked with Acheson and he said, "Stanley, if you did it it's done." Washington backed me up. The first thing we did was get some technicians down there to show them how to make up an application for a loan. MCKINZIE: You indicated that Dr. Bennett and you and President Truman accepted the idea that there wouldn't be any political overtones... ANDREWS: Yes. MCKINZIE: ...in this, but the fact that TCA was in the State Department, did that made any of these people suspicious? ANDREWS: No, it didn't make any difference because only the ambassadors bothered us in various countries wanting some pet project. Mr. Acheson didn't. We always had a conference ahead of going before
Congress. The procedure is to lead off with the top man, with the little boys coming in later. Acheson would ask, "Stanley, tell me what I'm supposed to say for this damned pie in the sky program you got." The political overtones were that we would do those things that the country wanted to do to the end that living standards could be raised and political stability should be improved. Take in Indonesia, their railroads went to pieces when the Dutch left. Docks were clogged up from hell to breakfast with goods. A ship would have to sit out there six weeks before it could get unloaded. We recruited an old retired locomotive engineer, one man. He went down there and crawled in those boilers and fooled around these engines. He found that the water they were using was crusting the pipes. The boilers wouldn't make steam. He straightened that out just right now. With his help the railroad and port organization were in real operation there in six or eight weeks. The Indonesians in the meantime had insisted on having a national
airline. Like all new countries they wanted the best. The Convair had just come out. We tried to let them buy some surplus DC-3's for $600 each, but, oh no. "We want six Convairs." They went ahead and bought them, but there wasn't any maintenance, so they bought 25 million dollars worth of machine shop equipment. Theoretically, Holland was going to put in technicians and repair the planes in Indonesia. Holland found out it was easier to repair them in Holland. So the Convairs had to be sent up to Holland to be repaired. This was expensive. So they cannibalized the parts out of planes in Indonesia. When I was down there the second time four of the Convairs were on the dead line. There were only two of them in operation. Well, we were fortunate again. About that time the American Airlines that had an overseas service consolidated with Pan-American. They let loose a lot of mechanics. We found and got an old mechanic and he went down there and trained the Indonesians to
do their own work. He took the machine shop out of the box. It was a repair facility and it put those planes in the air. The last time I was in Indonesia that line had as good a load factor as any line in the United States. Just one man helped do that job. He made mechanics out of those kids. They were all eager to try. Too often we Americans tend to brush the locals out of the way. And we do it ourselves. But he couldn't; he was one fellow. They've got a repair plant down there that takes care of the present lines. MCKINZIE: Yes. ANDREWS: And the irony of it is on my first trip to Amsterdam en route to Jakarta, as I was on the way down a guy in an Afghan cap sat across the aisle from me. I thought he was just some Indonesian businessman. As we stopped along the way I noticed the airline people gave him a good deal of attention. In those days you flew for 18 hours and then stopped at a host house for rest and then flew another 18. We stopped in Cairo, and in Thailand
and stayed over night there. When we arrived in Jakarta there was the damdest crowd of people you ever saw, a brass band and everything else. I thought, "This can't be for, me." You see how my ego was working. There's a good deal of scurrying around and the little guy was Sukarno coming back from Amsterdam where Indonesia had won her independence. These are somewhat isolated instances of how technology and know-how properly used worked out. One of the big weaknesses of the whole concept, and I'll take responsibility for it along with Dr. Bennett and other people, is that we felt that we could quickly transfer a lot of the really advanced know-how into these countries. It can't be done. You've got to train a lot of little people step by step. One can go out here and build a fertilizer plant, but if they can't run it, you don't do anything. We've got monuments all over the world where millions were spent, but it takes years to develop a genuine industrial complex. For instance, the fertilizer plant in
the Philippines was ten years before it got moving beyond 20 percent of capacity. Cost 80 million dollars. Such things have got to move as the people move and are educated to make the best use of them. MCKINZIE: Let me ask you this: When the first legislation for the Point IV program was introduced into Congress, there was a companion bill, which provided for investment guarantees ANDREWS: That's right. MCKINZIE: ...for industries, fertilizer companies and development of resources. ANDREWS: That's right. MCKINZIE: For example, I might go down and set up an 80 million dollar plant. As always happens the bill for investment guarantees got sent off to banking and currency and the other bill got sent off to foreign Affairs. They got all split up and it was never considered a package by Congress. I was under the impression that it went in there
as a package. That Technical Assistance would work sort of in conjunction with guaranteed outside investments. ANDREWS: Of course, that was the philosophy. I talked this over with Fulbright. I guess it is just as well I point out here how I got to be the last administrator of Point IV. You may have read it in the Truman Library, you may not have. After Dr. Bennett's death I held the thing together; I made this 29 nation tour and came back and presented our case to Congress. If I do say it myself, we won. We got more money than we asked for. In the meantime, a search was on for an administrator. You remember at this time Mr. Truman was very unpopular, and there wasn't any big Democrat that wanted a political future who would listen to him, and the Republicans wouldn't either. I recommended five or six. I searched for people that could bring competence to Point IV as well as dignity, and a name. Nothing seemed to happen. At one time it looked like Dr. John Hannah, president of Michigan
State might take the job. As a matter of fact, the State Department already had his biography, and everything made up. But Hannah then came out for Eisenhower in Life magazine. The farm organizations' principal organized backers of Point IV protested, "This can't be." They went to the State Department or Mr. Truman, I don't know who, and the idea was dropped. In the meantime we were trying to move and we were moving. I was only acting, but brother I acted like I run the show. And so one day, I think in April '52 or sometime about that, I got a call from Dawson at the White House. He says, "The Boss wants to see you." I had just come back from a trip around. I did lots of travel because I wanted to see what was going on out there. You can't do anything in Washington but read reports and shuffle papers. I said, "What does he want to talk to me about?" "Well," he said, "he wants to talk to you about Point IV." I figured he wanted a report on my trip.
I said, "Fine. When does he want me?" He says, "Come up right now." Well, I shuffled around right quick and got a lot of pictures that had been taken on this trip so to visualize what this thing was all about. I went into Dawson's office and he says, "Now don't talk to anybody when you get out of here, and tell me about Point IV." This old country boy, I just spun it out like nobody's business. And directly the bell rang and he says, "The President wants to see you now." I walked in and Mr. Truman was sitting in his office scratching on some papers and he looked and he said, "Well, there were three of my Cabinet members in here this morning whom I respect and they tell me that you're the man to run Point IV." I said, "My God, Mr. President, I'm nothing but an Arkansas apple knocker and I already submitted people in here who could bring dignity to it and as much competence as I can, and I think they would be a better deal." "Well," he said, "these fellows I've got confidence
in and they say you're it. And," he says, "you're it." He says, "I want you to take it." He says, "If I'm ever remembered fifty years after I'm dead, it will probably be because my name is associated with some of these programs. And I want you to run that thing like you own it. If any of my men come around to tell you what to do, you tell them I've got your telephone number and if I want to give you any orders, I'll give them to you. If you come into any tough decisions that'll embarrass you to make, you tell me and I'll make them for you." My God, you could do something on that. MCKINZIE: Did you ever call him and ask him to make a decision? ANDREWS: Hell no, I just made them. And he backed me a hundred percent. You could work on that without looking back over your shoulder. He also said this important thing. "Don't ask a man his religion, his color or his politics, but find a man who can do the job that you want done." You could go; you didn't
have to fool around. When the Congressmen came over to get some lout a job, you just say, "Very sorry, we haven't got room for that kind of a guy." And I didn't have anybody to put on any political appointments, at all. Even Mr. Truman's brother tried to wrangle in there into a big job. I said, "If Mr. Truman tells me to put you on, I'll put you on, but he'll have to get another administrator tomorrow morning." I said, "That's perfectly all right. We have only got a little shop and the orders are to do a job and we're trying to do it." The only political overtone we had was that this was a longtime political program so far as foreign policy was concerned. We were to stay away from projects that would be set up to woo some political position. We had a hell of a time with some of our ambassadors. They saw this as a big thing for them to build good will upon. Our very good ambassador in Pakistan didn't know what this thing was all about. He went to the Pakistan Foreign Office and got them all fired up that we were going
to write big checks and kick up a lot of dust. I went out to sign the agreement. We signed the agreement, took the pictures of the ambassador and the Foreign Minister and things were easy. At the reception after the signing the director of the Economic Council of the government, Said Hassan, was there. I had known him for a number of years off and on through FAO and other international meetings. And he said, "Well, now that that's done, let's get down to business. Here are the projects we want financed." So I remarked, "My God, Dr. Hassan, we haven't even discussed what your programs are. What are they?" "I want 10 million dollars for a sugar mill, and I want 13 million for a fertilizer plant," and right on down the line. I said, "There's been some mistake somewhere. If anybody has indicated to you that we have that kind of money it's just wrong." A very, very tense situation developed. We finally convinced him of what we were trying to do. If we take it
slow we'd find out if they had any brown coal to run the fertilizer plant. We'd find out whether they had any sugar to refine. See if they have the cane fields and production to back up a mill. You've got to have a planted acreage and so forth. He was pacified and they started a nice little program there and it moved on. We put in the initial amount of the seed money that eventually put in a fertilizer plant, but that fertilizer plant was eight years before it ever paid off at all. I was going out of the administration and Point IV was being consolidated into the International Cooperation Administration under Stassen. And a whole new deck of cards was shipped up. Stassen didn't believe in the Point IV concept. He said, "Stanley, you got a bunch of nice little chicken feed stuff here that sounds good, but what does it amount to?--I didn't come in here as Mutual Security Director to liquidate the foreign aid program; we're going to make it bigger." And that was when I had made a commitment to Bedell Smith, in the State Department, that I
would stay and see the appropriation through. And Bedell said, "Arkansas, you're the only guy that knows a damned thing about this and you just got to stay with it." In the meantime, I knew that the politicians were going to fire me sooner or later. I had resigned three or four times to Mr. Eisenhower, but they'd pigeon-holed my resignation. Anyhow, they came around then to the appropriation that I was supposed to put up to Congress. So, we had a meeting in Bedell Smith's office. The State Department always has these meetings to renew plans for congressional hearings. The State Department came up with a 900 million dollar deal. And I said, "Well, hell, if that's the kind of a thing that you people want me to present to Congress I can't do it. I'm out." "Well," they said, "this has got to be," and we had really a bad knockdown. The India desk men argued, "We're just not going to be responsible for India going into Communism and then losing Asia. Now, we've got to have this money."
"Well," I said, "I can't present this to Congress with a straight face. You guys get somebody else." Then Smith called on all the people around the table. Each made their big pitch. And so it finally came to me. "Well," I said, "Mr. Smith, I guess I'm wrong, but I can't see the maximum that you could possibly spend under any circumstances in the underdeveloped countries at this time more than 300 million dollars." I said, "I'd rather set a sight on 200 million a year for 20 years instead of 300 or 900 million in one year." Well, anyhow, we had a big row and finally Smith said, "Well, Arkansas, in my heart I think you're right, but here are some smart people who say that you're wrong." He says, "What in the hell am I to do?" He says, "I'm going to take this to Mr. Dulles." Dulles cut it back to 300 million, and it went over to the White House and Stassen went over and intervened with the Budget Bureau at the White House and added another 50. I told them, "All right
now, you say you've got the money to spend; you've got to show me where you want to spend it." They said, "You get on a bicycle and go out through the Middle East and Asia and you'll find projects for which this is needed." So, I went to Egypt. Of course, they were going to spend a lot on the Aswan Dam and there was a mysterious hundred million dollars in there for the Middle East. I couldn't figure where in the hell you were going to spend a hundred million dollars in the Middle East. I went on out to India and I looked at the dams and river developments the Indians had underway and you could, by twisting your conscience a little bit, say, "Well, we can go along with it." And so I came back and presented it to the Congress. The damn thing went through. That hundred million dollars for the Middle East, I didn't know at the time, was put in there by the people in the State Department who were interested in the oil deal, and the big oil companies to protect this oil in the Middle East.
MCKINZIE: Political overtones. ANDREWS: Yes, that's right. That money was never spent until Eisenhower sent the Richards mission. Richards was a former chairman of House Appropriations. He went out through the Middle East with that hundred million dollars in his pocket. He dropped 40 million in Ethiopia, so much in Jordan, so much in Egypt, so much in Syria, so much in Iraq. As far as I know, eight years later, they had never agreed on how they were going to spend the 40 million in Ethiopia. And there's some of the money, I'11 bet you, still lying around not spent in some of these places. That was the beginning of the Eisenhower doctrine. You remember Eric Johnston went out and resold the Jordan River scheme. And we had landed Marines in Lebanon and then Eisenhower made his big pitch before the United Nations for immediate solution. Well, I was asked to come up by the then ICA. What was first the Foreign Operations Administration was now ICA. I sat down with the ICA
people and we drafted Ike's speech for the United Nations. And seven of the eleven points that I had in my draft Eisenhower used in that speech. But that was purely political. Not a single thing happened. We made this big splash, big news; we blamed the Arabs for not moving. They blamed us for not moving. MCKINZIE: Now, how did Africa fit into the picture? ANDREWS: Well, Africa at this time was under colonial rule, with the exception of Ethiopia. We had programs in Ethiopia. Other African areas were coming out as new and sovereign states. There was a sort of a tacit agreement that we would let European countries have the leeway in those areas. That we would support it and follow, but we would let them take the lead. And for quite a long time that was the way it was done. Only recently, well, I would say after Kennedy came in, did we begin to give serious attention to these 56 new countries in the African Continent.
In the meantime the Chinese and the Russians walked in all over the place. We were wanted in Africa very much because a lot of their leaders had come up to Ethiopia and had seen particularly what had happened there in education and health. Ethiopia has got one of the finest health programs in the whole of Africa. And it was done, frankly, by Point IV in defiance of all the bureaucratic and congressional rules. MCKINZIE: How so? ANDREWS: The United Nations had a big medical mission there, Czech, Russians, British, Slavs and all kinds of people, medical people, who were working in that area. The United Nations had limited funds and many technical people, and we had money and very few technicians. We set up a joint operation to move step by step and at the pace that Ethiopia could finance most of it. It was a complete, united outfit. I got hell for it because I was putting some of our materials and some of our money in a United Nations deal and also our technicians. But
they didn't fire me. The Ethiopian program had a clear-cut plan. One is, you started first on the airborne diseases, principally malaria and dysentery; then you stepped up to waterborne diseases. You set up clinics and health centers only as fast as you could train Ethiopians to run them. You'd set up maybe 50 centers a year and over a period of five, ten years, the country was blanketed with a well-coordinated, cracker jack of a health service, which Ethiopia was supporting. The only bust in Ethiopia, on the health and sanitation side, was in the village well program. We could have escaped that if we'd just been thinking. The first thing health people look at when they get into a village is the water supply because that is a carrier of diseases, principally typhoid and dysentery. The big problem was sanitary water. We set up a big well drilling campaign. We put out crews with modern drilling rigs into these villages. We asked, "Would you like to have a well?" The villagers maybe would say nothing or say, "Si si"--"yes." The crews would
go out and drill a well, put a casing in it and a Meyers pump on it. The mayor and his wife would come out and pose for a picture of it. This would come back to Washington as so many wells have been drilled and so many villages have sanitary water. We drilled hundreds of those wells. I went out there ten years later to find out what happened to the health program, and particularly the well program. In 90 percent of the cases, the pump was pulled out and lying on the roadside somewhere and the pipe was lying around there all bent up, and in most cases the well itself was filled full of rock. I began to ask, "Why, what the hell happened here?" In the first place, any country boy knows that a Meyers pump that's made in Ashland, Ohio has a rocker arm on it. And that rocker arm is the first thing that wears out. When you put a village well in and maybe a thousand people use that well, that pump has got to run 24 hours a day. And that rocker arm went out and the only place that you could get a rocker arm was in
Ashland, Ohio. And so they tried every way and they couldn't do anything, or maybe the leathers wore out. They jerked the pipe out and then tried to dip water out of the well. They didn't have those long canisters that you could dip in the old-fashioned dipper well. On top of that, this ten inch casing was just about the size for a kid. to get his head stuck in. They just filled them up all over the whole country. That was a bust. If you read it here in Washington, that program was out of this world. We asked some of the mayors, "Why didn't you use the well in your village?" They replied, "You didn't ask us about it and it isn't in the right place. We didn't want it there; we want it up here, and so they're not using it." On the other hand, the Point IV well program in Taiwan was done right, because we had some smart Chinese to help us. In Taiwan you went out and talked to the village, "Would you like to have sanitary water?"
"Oh, yes, we'd like to have sanitary water." "Well, what can you do?" "Well, we might be able to help dig the well, but we got no cement, we got no tools." "Well, we'll get you the cement and maybe the tools. Will you dig the well?" You discussed what kind of well they wanted. In Taiwan they want a cistern type about six feet around and around this a cement platform about 15 feet square, with a rim around the well up about eight inches above that platform. In most African or Asian countries going to the well is a big deal, in all of these societies. The women dress up in their best clothes and go down with a bucket or jar on their head. Instead of having to wait for somebody to pump a bucket and move, four of them could dip their water out at one time. They could bring the kids down there and wash them; they could wash the vegetables, and everything else on that platform. It was their well and they took care of that well. Today you can go out there and they're all
over the place being used. But we didn't have sense enough to do this, and the hell of it is, what makes me mad, is we made the same mistake in South Vietnam and Laos and came near doing it in Thailand when the Thais stopped us on it. MCKINZIE: You mean on the well program? ANDREWS: Yes. MCKINZIE: And your argument is they didn't have local people involved... ANDREWS: That's right. MCKINZIE: ...in the actual drilling and care of the well? ANDREWS: All right now you got to do this work. And we'll do this if you'll do that. And boy it was an amazing thing. Then it becomes "our well." This pump that went down out there in Ethiopia was the Point IV pump to the people, not theirs. It was a Point IV well. The psychology has entirely shifted. If you recall the Peterson
report on aid that's theoretically where we're going to start now, twenty years too late, involving people in the program. After the Point IV shifted to Stassen, although you kept technical cooperation in the picture, it was a case of it being just a little tail on the dog that once in awhile could wag. Big money changed the emphasis. If a mission director knows he's got 50 million dollars he can spend, it's a whole lot easier for him to commit a check than it is to tell a country, "All right now, if you'll do this, we'll put the rest in." You improve your own image, you see, when you put that 25 million dollars in, and not the image of the other guy. What these developing countries want is improvement of their own image. This was true in Latin America. Hell, we went down there and started solving problems before you got off the plane. When Eisenhower went through about two or three years trying to get an appropriation for foreign aid, he called six of his Cabinet members and in real mule skinning language said, "I want
to know why in the hell it is that ten years and [at that time] 90 billion-dollars later, we're less thought of, we're more hated and more uncertain throughout the world than we were when we started. I want you guys to come up with some answers." Like all Cabinet members they got together to find somebody to do the work. At that time--I've forgotten what the name of the office was--but it was headed by a fellow from Time and Life magazine, and they were doing a kind of psychological type warfare in the so-called cold war at a very high level. They'd about run out of anything to do. So, they assigned this job to that agency. When they began to figure how they were going to do it they decided to do some of it themselves and hire land grant colleges or individuals to do some of it. Some way, some how, they got ahold of my name. They called me up to Washington and said, "Would you undertake a part of this study? There's only going to be six copies of it made; we're
going to survey the entire world and we're going to try to find out what the image of the United States is." They said, "We're going to try to find out what the image of the soldier is, the image of the businessman, the image of the diplomat, the image of the educator, and we want you to find out how the village people view the agricultural and educational worker that goes to the villages." And they said, "We'll give you a hundred dollars a day and travel money." "I'll do it if Michigan State doesn't object." I was at Michigan State at the time, and President [John Alfred] Hannah said, "That's fine, go to it." I went to work and I surveyed people, not Americans, but other people from 22 countries, including quite a number of Latin-Americans, Middle Easterners, and Asians and made a short report I'll try to find that report. I've got it somewhere. It was my little part of the big report. You remember in the Kennedy campaign, they were always trying to get a report theoretically out that showed
how the United States stood. Well, Jim Hagarty knew what Kennedy was shooting at was this study. But Jim Hagarty switched him off to the Voice of America survey which you could pick up in any Library. This report was never made public. It was seen by some of the Cabinet members but it was locked in the White House. And when Eisenhower left there it was either burned or taken. There's no copy of the total report. I've got my little piece of it. MCKINZIE: Was this a critical study? Was Eisenhower right? Was he right in thinking that the United States was thought of worse ten years later? ANDREWS: Oh hell yes. When you go to people in strictest confidence and let them tell you their story you get some very ear burning material. I'11 give you one little incident, then we'll go in and eat. I landed in Peru and went around to see the Minister of Agriculture. And I said, "What is your view of the Americans, particularly the
agriculture and educational field, and how they worked here and in your country?" "Well," he said, "you Americans are wonderful people. You're generous, you've given us all kinds of money, but," he says, "you never listen. You come into our country here and treat us as second-class citizens as if we know nothing and you brush us aside and go ahead and make damned fool mistakes." And he said, "If you would just listen and work along with us, together you'd--we'd save us a lot of trouble. We appreciate, and you've done wonderful things for us, but we could have done so much more together." I go out to India and down to a village, "What is your image of the agricultural man that works in this area?" "Well, he was the man who was here yesterday with a camera." That is pretty damning. Although in another instance a man, Hans Cardell, in one district of India there's a monument to him. Just one man, a Dane, who was in the Michigan State Extension Service that understood how to work with
groups. He transformed 80 million people in that area in their agriculture and the rural communities. But he did it patiently working with the people and among other things gave them confidence in themselves. And he's almost a god down there in that particular province. I'm not just saying that all over the world it was bad; I'm saying that we could have done so much better if we'd just stopped and thought the thing through. MCKINZIE: Do you think the small programs that were in operation while you were directing them were better received than the ones in operation now? ANDREWS: Well, they were better received for the simple fact that people knew what we were trying to do. We made lots of busts--we made all kinds of mistakes and all I'm bellyaching about is that nobody paid any attention to our mistakes. We could have saved millions of dollars and all kinds of trouble if we'd just profited by the Point IV mistakes. Dr. Bennett and I were wrong; we thought we could send
a county agent out and immediately put in an extension service and agricultural college system and transform things overnight. You can't do it. The people who were the most effective in these early programs were the vocational agricultural teachers and public health people. They knew this business of teaching young and old people. They were the most effective people in the whole darn business. They took it slow. In the health program in the places where we had people we learned that to be effective a person had to stay there a long time. I've fought, bled and died for the principle that when a man is assigned to a country, and works up with the country a program, he stays there until that program is reasonably successful. But you have this damnable two-year rotation. In public health now, for instance, the man that went to Thailand was there eight years. That man created miracles. Thailand has the finest public health service in all of Asia. And it's the labor of this man, plus the willingness of the Thais. They've not only got a public health system
manned by Thais, they've got medical schools; they've got the whole environmental business in health. It's good. But that man held those fellows' feet to the fire for eight years. A lot of times in early Point IV we'd say, "Well, here's a man that's a good chicken man. I sent him down to Guatamala. He's going to solve all the problems with chickens," and I could tell you a chicken story that'll knock you over, about Guatamala. He stays there two years and gets them going and has some nice reports and comes home. You wait around for two or three months to get another chicken man there. The new man says, "This thing is crazy, we got to go this way." The people are awfully baffled on that sort of business. And another phase of this--I'll mention this and then we'll quit until this afternoon. Under the Marshall plan, the orientation of the people that went out was about the economics of the country. How many factories, how many cats, how many cows, how this, the whole orientation program
could be summed up in "knowledge about." It was very evident that that sort of thing wouldn't work in our sort of program. "Knowledge about" didn't do you a damned bit of good. And so I sent some anthropologists out and said, "Tell me how you transfer know-how to people who can't read or write, can't even speak their own dialects, or understand their dialects. How do you do it?" Well, they come back; Margaret Mead was one of them, and this fellow from Michigan State, really distinguished top people. They come back with a great big report advising on the barriers to what we were trying to do. I said, "My God, what you're saying is probably true, but it'll take us ten years to even begin to start, let alone do anything. Here's Congress, wanting me to come up next year and say what we've accomplished. If I don't, we get no appropriations." And I said, "All we'll have to do is just to hope that we don't make enough mistakes that we discredit ourselves. We're going to have to move the best we can."
I decided then the thing to do is to give these Americans that go out a touch of anthropology. We made a contract with the Foreign Service Institute and I paid the Foreign Service Institute $350 to give a six weeks training course to each American that we sent out. It was a heavy dose of anthropology. I thought that would solve the problem. It just didn't. It just played hell because you made a bunch of amateur anthropologists who began to look at the differences between our culture and theirs and not at the likes. We had fellows still sitting out observing another culture at work and you were hanging presents on the Christmas tree on the outside of it. A tree doesn't grow from the outside, it grows from the inside. That anthropology gamble was a bust. It didn't work. MCKINZIE: But you'd still agree that the concept was a good one, that if you could have made... ANDREWS: Oh yes, that's right. But it takes lots of training, you see. MCKINZIE: Yes.
ANDREWS: And I think we could have done it better if you hadn't had such high level anthropology if you'd had a practical fellow, that understood psychological and ethnic cultures with more knowledge of human behavior. Human behavior's pretty well the same all over the world. We're all searching for a certain amount of ego involvement and dignity. In the meantime I'm out of Point IV in the Eisenhower "walk away." I go down to Michigan State, go to work with the national project in Agriculture Communications. The idea was to study how you get an idea from one person to another and how does an idea move through a social system. So I said, "Oh, I've got the answer now; communications is the answer." I went up to Washington a couple of times. They wanted me up there to make some statements before congressional committees and I went to see Senator Fulbright. I said, "Senator, the big story here is communication and an American who can't speak the language is just lost out there. So therefore I want you to insert in this bill a sum of money that will require every American going
out to at least have a smattering of the language of the country to which he is assigned." By golly, eight million dollars went in and eight million dollars then set up training systems everywhere. A lot of people--they were paid to go to these schools--spoke and learned the language, some of them very fluently, and some of them not very good. That was also a bust in part. Psychologically wrong, because this little fellow who's confronted by a six foot, two hundred pound American, while he's 80 pounds, colored and ignorant, is groping for some power over you. If you can speak his language as well as he could, or even smattering, brother you just made the thing that much worse. But if you could go to him and say, "Listen, I don't know a thing about your language, will you help me?" Then the other fellow feels a little dignity on his own. We worked that out. I'll tell you about it a little later in the International Voluntary Services, when we sent these young people out into these villages, and that's another phase of Point IV we'll
talk about. We said to these young people, "The first thing we want you to do is find a Vietnamese or a Laotian, or a Nepalese, or an Indian who wants to learn English. You teach him English and he'll teach you his language. That's the first thing you do." Well, anyhow, to make a long story short, I decided mere language training was not enough. At Michigan State we began to get into this communication problem in depth. We looked at communications in terms of how people behave. We stumbled onto something that if we could have had it when we started we might have done a better job in Point IV. It looked like we were going to get AID to try out the behavioral communications idea. It went clear up in the Eisenhower administration, to the last man, and he said, "Well, damn it, this looks like something awful good, but you know we've got so many things I'll just have to put it off for awhile." And the fellow that was carrying it through the bureaucracy was sent to Africa and the whole thing collapsed. One fellow
in education out in Thailand got 250 thousand dollars into the AID budget out there to introduce this concept of training for people. When that came into Washington they knocked it out. The whole thing collapsed except for one little training program which is still going on down in Virginia, in which you give foreigners that come over here a debriefing session as they go out. This training makes them face up to the fact, "Now you've been to the United States, now you've seen all these places; what does that mean to my country?" You put them into a situation when they will finally say, "My God Almighty, what does it mean to my country and how am I going to relate this to our problems." It's been very successful and it is one thing that AID bought that's still running. This system has been used by Michigan State people to train Dow Chemical, Standard Oil and company personnel going to foreign assignments. We've never been able to get it into the orientation for Government people going out. If I had my way I
wouldn't let a secretary go out without going through that training. It gives an entirely different concept of human behavior and it doesn't exaggerate the differences in human beings. It finds the common denominator that's between me and you as a black man and a white man. It emphasizes the likeness rather than the differences. MCKINZIE: Does this bother you that they didn't think of these things earlier? I mean you learned to think of this in the long range. ANDREWS: Yes. The point is, I didn't think of it. I'll be perfectly frank, I didn't. I know we were wrong somewhere but I didn’t know how in the hell to do it. I was searching for something. When I got to Michigan State we had this million dollar Kellogg Fund. We were to find out how an idea spreads among people. At least 50 percent of the rural population is completely untouched by our agricultural programs in the U.S.A. It all stops at the bottom of the lower middle class. How can we expect to reach the millions in these
underdeveloped countries without going on down through to people; people participating. Two more things and talk for the rest of the day, but I think we ought to quit with these two and ask your opinion, let you ask questions. As we said in the beginning, this Point IV idea was a kind of a white hope to church people, to just good solid American citizens who were willing to do good. Young people wanted to come and work in the Point IV program. Most of them were highly motivated from the various religious organizations. There were about 75 religious organizations that had various kinds of programs all over the world. I may have arrived at an erroneous conclusion that the missionaries were a place at least where you could begin to get a foothold. They probably knew more about the real situation than the other groups. I courted opinions from the missionaries and in one case I gave the Presbyterian Board of Missions money to run a hospital in Thailand. They were doing a good job; they were having a hell of a time with money, and I said, "You can do a better
job than we can so take it." They took it one year and then said, "No, we can't do that, because we're a tax exempt organization and for other reasons cannot take government money." Well, people from these 75 organizations were always coming in saying, "What can we do for you?" You can't see 75 people every day. I said, "I'll tell you what I'll do. You say, and I know there are thousands of young people who would like to get into this program. What I am up against, the minute that a Form 57 comes in here on one of those young people to the personnel office, the first thing they ask is, 'What is the experience?"' Some old duffer with a bald head and gray hairs and with a big record here is hired immediately. They wouldn't hire these kids. I couldn't get them by State Department. I suggested to the group, "You people all get together and form a non-profit organization and set up a board of directors and select a thousand of these young people who want to go out. The idea
is to work in the villages, not in towns, right out in the villages. I'11 find them something to do." And this was getting pretty close to the end of my regime in Washington. I took Dale Clark out of the Mid-east staff and put him over with what we called the International Advisory Development Board. He worked with these organizations to set up some sort of a central organization which could speak for all of them. We put some money over there and Dale set out to organize these people and to see what we could do. They went to work and one day they came in the office and said, "We've got an organization; we have some money of our own and we've got a thousand people that want a job." I said, "Okay, what kind of people are they?" "Well, they're all kinds: agriculture, public health, education and so forth." I said, "All right, give me a little time and I'll get them a job." And the policy then was to send them out under a senior citizen. He was to be the boss, because they were not going to have
any contact with the TCA mission in town. They were going to have limited contact with the government agencies only to the extent that the government was involved in these village programs. Well, I wired our country director in Iraq, ''Find a place way out in the boondocks for seven people with these qualifications -- agriculture, public health, education, sanitation, and rural development." I allocated $150,000. At that time I could allocate it direct out of general funds. I didn't have to go through bureaucratic procedures. "Now you take this money and you spend it, but spend it wisely and when this is out ask for more and I'll send you more." Well, they went out and by golly, really miracles happened, and awfully quick. In the meantime then the Eisenhower administration came in and Stassen fired everybody. The country director heard about this program and wanted to get his hands on it.
It became a big struggle; this little mission had made terrific rapport with the people and also with key people in the Iraq ministries who were interested in rural development. ICA wanted to have the budget run through the central ICA office. There was a big row. I was gone by this time, but the little IVS group stuck it out for about four years. A11 the time ICA was trying to kill it. Finally with the help of the Egyptians they did kill it, because the Egyptians were trying to infiltrate that part of the area and they were carrying on a campaign against the Americans out in that area. The mission was pulled out, but Henry Weiss who was the country director under Eisenhower says, "That was the most effective little group of people that we've ever dealt with." In the meantime we put others in Nepal and Egypt and several other countries including Vietnam. When Stassen got through with his land grant college business, he wanted to know something about IVS. When I showed him the board of directors of
IVS, eleven of the great missionary and philanthropic organizations that in their total membership represented about 75 million people: Presbyterian Board of Missions, Methodist Board of Missions, and Friends Service, the Bretheren's, and the Land Grant College Association, the Rockefeller Foundation, and so forth, he got excited and he said, "Oh, this is something great." And he said, "How much money do you think this thing needs?" I said, "It doesn't need too much, but it does need top level support because the people in ICA down below hate us and are trying to kill us off." He said, "I'll take care of that." And so he allocated a million dollars to the program and said, "Go ahead and make it great." I said, "I'm not going to be here very long and I don't think we want to go too fast. The idea is to start in with three or four people and if they justify themselves we'll put in four more. And five more and," I said, "in five years you might have 50 people in Iraq, but it must go that way."
That was too little for him. He did set aside a million dollars and about the time this began to turn, Stassen was fired. Hollister came in. Hollister was put in there by Herbert Hoover, Jr., to liquidate the ICA. By this time I was at Michigan State and he called me up at Michigan State and said, "Andrews, how would you like to come back in the Government?" "Well," I said, "I'm pretty well set out here and I'm not very much interested in leaving this program." "Well," he said, "you're represented to me as being an economical operator." And he said, "I want to cut this God damned thing down to size and I want you to come up here and do it." "Well," I said, "Mr. Hollister, I'll go on one condition, and that is if President Eisenhower calls me into his office and says, 'Stanley Andrews, I want you to do this specific thing,' I'll do it. But I'm not going to get mixed up in this, and besides more money will have to be spent, not less. I know damn well that Mr. Eisenhower doesn't operate
that way. He puts it on the staff to hire and fire." That ended the conversation. I went to see him once and talked to him about some other matters. He brought up a lot of stuff about ICA and IVS. It was plain he wanted to liquidate it. He looked over this one million Stassen had set aside for IVS and immediately chopped it off. Then began an almost superhuman effort to survive as a little voluntary organization. Hell, we got money from Rotary Clubs and churches and private citizens and we just hung on. It wasn't long till Hollister got fired and Jim Smith came in. Smith was administrator. Smith was a pretty damned shrewd fellow and a sharp duck, and we were about to liquidate. By this time I was out and on the board of IVS. And these people were all discouraged and felt they must liquidate. I said, "Let me just take one more shot at this." I wrote Jim Smith a personal letter and I said, "I think that I can speak for a little organization that you ought to be interested in and
I wonder if you'd be willing to meet three of our board of directors? I don't want to even be in the group." Well, I got a letter back from him, "Sure, set the time and we will see you." Our group went over and we laid on the line what we had. The fellow that was in charge of technical assistance in ICA was one of these supply-demand fellows. He sat and watched the gross national product curve. If it went up just a little bit, this was success, regardless of anything else. And what's his name began to talk, "But, but Jim, you can't do this." Smith said, "God damn it, John, I'm running this. It looks to me like here's a reservoir of people that do what we ought to do." He said to our group and a fellow in the sociology department, "You fellows go out and draft a cable to every mission in the world in under-developed countries saying what this program is, saying I am interested in seeing these young people have a chance to work and that we would approve anything they did on that."
We did it. It went out and we got stuff, of course, pouring in, but it stopped at the bureaucracy. Those fellows would just sit on the requests. I talked to Smith just before he quit. He says, "This is the God damndest place I've ever seen. You put things out, but nothing ever comes up. It just churns around here. I'm burned up and to hell with it." He was seeking a job with the Navy. They didn't give him the Assistant Secretary of Navy job so he got in his station wagon one afternoon and went back to Denver. That was the end of Jim Smith in ICA. Then Riddleberger came in as administrator. Riddleberger was a professional diplomat and wouldn't move on anything. Dennis Fitzgerald then really took over and ran the outfit. But we hung on, just getting a little bit here and a little bit there. We had a good mission in Vietnam, good mission in Laos and Nepal. Lodge, Ambassador in Vietnam, discovered these kids. They were right out to the village, they were never in Saigon. Lodge said, "These hundred kids here are
the most effective Americans in South Vietnam; we want more of them." Well, Lodge wasn't there long until he was fired. General Maxwell Taylor took over. When Maxwell Taylor came in a fellow by the name of Killian became country director. Killian had been in Korea with Taylor. He decided to take over control of the IVS group. The Army had made a big map of the white and the black areas. They said, "No Americans are going to be in the black areas, and aid will go only to the white areas." These were only theoretical. For instance, in the big flood out there, our IVS boys rode those planes and made parachute drops into villages with food. They were not allowed to drop food in a black map village. They stuck it out and finally this fellow got fired. Another fellow came out and he discovered IVS. He wanted more IVS. It is a long story, but finally Bunker came in as Ambassador and Bunker said, "These are the most effective people in South Vietnam and
I want just as many as you can get there." He was a strong supporter but our IVS kids blew up their own program. These young people got fired up over the folly of the Vietnamese war, and they were getting into local politics. So, we're having a lot of trouble. They did marvelous work. All over South Vietnam and Southeast Asia, they talked about it. There's a good program in Laos. So, that's where it is now and I'm going to a board of directors meeting next week at which we're going to make some decisions on the future. (Note it was finally decided to withdraw IVS from South Vietnam due to Saigon policies on the war.) MCKINZIE: Of the IVS? ANDREWS: Under the Eisenhower administration IVS barely survived. After the people in a country had put up part of the money, after you'd agreed in the country on the plan, and sent it into Washington, it took from 18 months to two years to
get it through the bureaucracy. It just discarded, the whole doggone thing. So much for that little episode with these young people. When Kennedy started for the Presidency (and this is personal), I was on a committee that was set up by Chester Bowles with all this Eastern liberalist crowd, to blueprint a foreign aid program for Kennedy. Rostow was there and I went down to New York and they began to discuss something for Kennedy to talk about. Humphrey had made a little noise about a Peace Corps made up of young people. It was suggested that Kennedy might propose such a thing. Rostow said, "Oh, my God, we can't touch that one with a ten foot pole, because we get these damned kids out there and no telling what'll happen." And I said, "Well, gentlemen, you're just wrong as hell because it is happening and here's what it is," and I gave the IVS idea a selling. And they said, "All right, Andrews, you and Jack Bingham (who used to be my deputy), draft a memorandum and send it up to the speechwriters."'
So we did theoretically a policy paper. Kennedy was searching for something to appeal to the young people about. So, he goes out to Michigan and his entire speech was on this Peace Corps idea. And he got more letters and telegrams as a result of that than any single speech he made in the campaign. So Peace Corps was in. IVS then considered liquidating because we felt we'd demonstrated what you could do with young people. Shriver, the Peace Corps administrator, made a tour of all of our IVS missions and talked to the kids. He set the Peace Corps up on the basis of this IVS demonstration. But since Shriver could not forbid Jews to become members of the Peace Corps, and since we were operating big in the Middle East, they said, "You folks had better stay in and take care of these places where we can't go." There are places in Africa and in the Middle East that you couldn't get the Peace Corps in at all. We went ahead and limped along and were moving very, very good until we got all |
