BUILDING BRIDGES ACROSS CULTURES: A CASE STUDY OF THE PEOPLE-TO- PEOPLE CAMPAIGN, 1956-1975 BY BATTSETSEG SERJ Submitted to the graduate degree program in the Department of American Studies and the Graduate Faculty of the University of Kansas in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Co-Chairperson Theodore A. Wilson Co-Chairperson Sherrie J. Tucker Sheyda Jahanbani Megan Greene Brian Donovan Date Defended: May 27, 2014 i The Dissertation Committee for Battsetseg Serj certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: BUILDING BRIDGES ACROSS CULTURES: A CASE STUDY OF THE PEOPLE-TO- PEOPLE CAMPAIGN, 1956-1975 Co-Chairperson Theodore A. Wilson Co-Chairperson Sherrie J. Tucker Date approved: May 27, 2014 ii Abstract This study traces origins, operation, successes and failures of the People-to-People program featured during the second term of the Eisenhower presidency. The program was a product of and a reaction to the Cold War international conflicts that emanated from diametrically opposed ideologies of democracies and the communist world. U.S. claims to the superiority of democracy over communism were rooted in immediate post-war America’s quest for world leadership. The People-to-People campaign was a government-backed popular movement, which spread in the 1950s and expanded into the 1960s. It was partially coordinated and partially funded by the United States Information Agency during its first few years, with the expectation that it would attract private as well as grassroots support once it was launched. This dissertation explores People-to-People’s various programs and projects including the Sister- Cities and the University chapter as models for secular voluntary movements of ordinary citizens who were committed to improving mutual understanding between peoples from different cultures. The idealistic nature of people-to-people diplomacy, along with a wide variety of personal and social stakes associated with international travel and relations, made the People- to-People University program one of the most popular student organizations on college campuses in the 1960s. People-to-People’s popularity and ideals at that time attracted young Americans and provided them with both the opportunity and the enthusiasm to interact with foreign peoples at the grassroots level. It also gave them a sense of belonging to a broader, constructive human network, which promoted an appreciation of diverse cultures and a way to contribute to building the “bonds of solidarity” among people of many nations during the contested period of the Cold War. 1 Acknowledgments I am grateful for the following institutions, without whose financial support this work would not have been completed: The Fulbright Program, the Mongolian Government, PEO International, and the Soros Foundation. I would like to express my gratitude to the Department of East Asian Languages and Cultures, the Department of American Studies, and the Environmental Studies Program for giving me the opportunity to work as a teaching and research assistant. I owe a special debt to the Center for East Asian Studies, which so generously supported my research for several years through teaching opportunities and grants. This dissertation has heavily depended on archival sources, so many thanks to the archivists at the Eisenhower Presidential Library and the University of Kansas Archives at the Kenneth Spencer Research Library. This dissertation is based on oral histories and I would like to acknowledge the former volunteers of the People-to-People University program for their willingness to participate in my interviews: David M. Hann, Dale Sprague, Halley Kampschroeder, Jerry Gardner, Trisha Pitts, and Tommye Sexton. My advisors at the University of Kansas, Professor Theodore Wilson and Sherrie Tucker deserve special thanks for their invaluable intellectual guidance and support. They patiently responded to my ill-timed emails and were willing to accommodate me for many appointments. Also special thanks to Professor Sheyda Jahanbani for providing critical insights on people-to-people diplomacy. I am very grateful to Professor Megan Greene for her inestimable support throughout my studies at the University of Kansas. Finally, I thank my family who gave me the much-needed emotional support during my research. 2 Table of Contents Abstract………………………………………………………………………………. 1 Acknowledgements…………………………………………………………………. 2 Chapter one: Introduction…………………………………………………………... 4 Chapter two: Prelude to People’s Diplomacy in Postwar America……………..39 Chapter three: The People-to-People Movement, 1956-1966………………..103 Chapter four: The People-to-People University Program, 1961-1975……….149 Conclusion………………………………………………………………………….182 Bibliography………………………………………………………………………...188 Appendices………………………………………………………………………….209 3 Chapter One. Introduction Winning Hearts and Minds as Historical Experience The idea of winning hearts and minds of a global audience was a crucial part of America’s grand strategies during the Cold War era. But this idea was far from new. In a letter penned to James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, then American Ambassador to France recounted: “You see I am an enthusiast on the subject of the arts. But it is an enthusiasm of which I am not ashamed, as its object is to improve the taste of my countrymen, to increase their reputation, to reconcile to them the respect of the world and procure them its praise.”1 Jefferson’s enthusiasm for the role and influence of culture was inherently related to America’s mission of being a role model for the rest of the world, which was manifested in the vision of its earlier settlers. As early in 1630, John Winthrop emphasized that his Puritan community “shall be a “city upon a hill, the eyes of all people upon us.” Assumptions of the idealization of America became a policy priority by the late nineteenth century. The diplomatic historian Emily Rosenberg contended that late nineteenth and early twentieth century cultural and economic relations embodied a fundamental condition of a national interest and international betterment.2 It is rather complicated to define the interrelationships between diplomacy and the outreach initiatives undertaken by ordinary individuals in conducting international relations. According to the public diplomacy scholar Jan Melissen, in recent years non- 1Letter dated 20 September 1785 was quoted in Cynthia P. Schneider, “Culture Communicates: U.S. Diplomacy That Works,” in The New Public Diplomacy: Soft Power in International Relations, ed. Jan Melissen (New York: Palgrave, 2007), 147. 2 Emily S. Rosenberg, Spreading the American Dream: American Economic and Cultural Expansion 1890-1945 (New York: Hill& Wang, 1982), 230. 4 state actors “have turned out to be extremely agile and capable of mobilizing support at a speed that is daunting for rather more unwieldy foreign policy bureaucracies.”3 The increasingly active role of ordinary individuals in the practice of public diplomacy was especially visible during the Cold War era. However, the first effort to disseminate American ideals at the institutional level was Woodrow Wilson’s initiative to create the Committee of Public Information in 1917 after the United States relinquished its claim of neutrality and was drawn into global conflict. By appointing his long-term friend and a former newspaperman George Creel as head of the committee, Wilson placed a strong emphasis on the upcoming operations that would conceivably counteract against the propaganda of the Central Powers. Wilson’s emphasis served as a crucial boost for the fledgling committee. Creel stressed that “the fight for the minds of men as of almost equal significance to victories or defeats in the muddy trenches of the Western Front.”4 Although Creel’s committee actions successfully influenced the positive construction of America’s overseas image throughout the war, it was attacked at home and ultimately was abolished by Congress in 1919.5 It is interesting to note, however, that while government-led information programs were labeled as “psychological approaches” or “propaganda,” educational and cultural exchanges were characterized by such terms as “cooperative,” mutually 3 Jan Melissen, “The New Public Diplomacy: Between Theory and Practice,” in The New Public Diplomacy” Soft Power in International Relations, ed. Jan Melissen (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007), 24. 4Quoted in Robert Elder, The Information Machine: The United States Information Agency and American Foreign Policy (Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 1968), 34. 5 Richard Pells, Not Like Us: How Europeans Have Loved, Hated, and Transformed American Culture Since World War II (New York: Basic Books, 1997), 8. 5 understanding,” and “reciprocal.” Accordingly, there was a contested congressional debate that insisted the two be kept separate.6 Ultimately, in 1939, along with Franklin D. Roosevelt’s “good neighbor policy,” a division of cultural relations was created within the State Department. The Division was responsible for a variety of government-backed activities, including exchanges of students and teachers, book translations, and cultural broadcasting programs in Latin America. A year after the Division’s creation, the Office of Cooperation for Inter-American Affairs headed by Nelson Rockefeller was established. Roosevelt’s policy toward the newly established office was to encourage Rockefeller to “freewheel” his office “beyond the State Department’s cautious constraints.”7 The government’s