1986 Advisory Committee on Historical Diplomatic Documentation Report

The Advisory Committee on Historical Diplomatic Documentation met in Washington on November 6 and 7, 1986. We considered a wide range of issues. Among these were problems of records preservation in a computerized age, about which we must seek further information, and the possibility of pub­lishing supplements to the Foreign Rela­tions series containing intelligence re­ports not included when the volumes appeared, a matter on which we can give no opinion until we are permitted access to the materials involved. Howev­er, our primary concerns were two: the so-called “1960 by 1990” program for the Foreign Relations series, a timetable established since our last meeting, and the perennial problems of declassifica­tion.

“1960 by 1990”

Shortly after our meeting last year, President Reagan directed the Depart­ment of State and other appropriate agencies to prepare a plan that would “ensure the publication by 1990 of the foreign affairs volumes through 1960.” Responding promptly to this directive, the department and other agencies agreed upon a schedule that envisages publication of more than fifty volumes of Foreign Relations by the end of 1990.

Past presidential directives have or­dered adherence to a “twenty-five-year rule” and even a “twenty-year rule”—in other words, publication of Foreign Rela­tions no longer than twenty-five or twen­ty years after events covered in those volumes. Members of the committee, like the associations they represent, will not be satisfied until one or the other of these “rules” is formally restored and closely observed. On the other hand, we recognize that successful  implementa­tion of President Reagan’s directive would end the erosion, already under way, of the current “thirty-year” policy. (At present, three volumes in the 1952– 1954 series are still unpublished, and all but six of the twenty-seven volumes for 1955–1957 are still enmeshed in the declassification process.) Thus as a prac­tical matter we welcome the president’s directive, but we are not sanguine that his goal can be met. We see both prob­lems and dangers ahead.

Timetable

Those who framed the new plan con­sider the schedule, in the historian’s words, “ambitious but entirely rational.” We hope he is right but are not con­vinced.

The historical office, currently under­staffed, is already working at full stretch. To meet the 1990 publication deadline, it is estimated, the office will have to compile all proposed volumes by 1988. Most are already well along, but work has not yet begun on volume 2, Foreign Economic Policy, and volume 3, National Security, Arms Control, both cer­tain to create difficult problems when passed on to the declassifiers.

In the past, the declassification proc­ess has seldom taken less than four years. Although we are told that there has been some improvement recently, more dramatic progress is necessary if the 1990 target is to be met.  However, the State Department’s Classification/Declassification Center (CDC), which clears documents for the Department and then carries on extended negotia­tions with other agencies that may be involved, has had its budget substantial­ly reduced. We find it difficult to be confident that volumes compiled by the historical office as late as 1988, or even 1987, can be cleared in time to appear in print by 1990.

Finally, the sum currently allotted for printing is, as the department recog­nizes, inadequate to fund publication of the number of volumes envisaged over the next four years. We urge the histori­cal office to continue efforts to reduce printing costs, by negotiation with the Government Printing Office or by some other means, but we believe that addi­tional funds are imperative, even at a time when overall reductions in budget are likely.

Size of Volumes

While current budgetary conditions probably make some reduction in the scale of Foreign Relations inevitable, such is certainly the case if the 1990 target is to be attained. Editing, indexing, and printing costs would greatly exceed even hoped-for resources, and there could be no hope of meeting that target. The current plan calls for publication of about 6,000 pages for each year covered by the series, a reduction of 40 percent. To compensate, at least to a degree, for this very severe reduction, microform supplements will be issued. (They will not contain the editorial apparatus pres­ent in the printed volumes, thus effect­ing a substantial saving in costs, but the printed volume will contain footnote references to at least some documents in the supplements.) Overall, the  volume of material made available will not drop and may even increase.

The sharp reduction in printed mate­rials will be a very serious development, justifiable only as a temporary response to present conditions. Clearly scholars will find the new system more difficult to use, and there is at least a danger that, cumbersomeness aside, the value of Foreign Relations will be reduced. We view the change warily, urging all in­volved, especially the historical office, to proceed with great care. We are pleased that the historian desires to counsel with the committee and others; however, in order for us to advise him helpfully we must have access to materials currently denied.

Declassification

As we noted in our report last year, the declassification process is a matter of serious concern, and not only because it takes so much time. We recognize, as all reasonable scholars do, that some mate­rials cannot be made public even after the passage of thirty years, but we believe that the number of such docu­ments is small. We believe, above all, that classification should not be used to obscure the fundamental record of American foreign relations, and it is our most basic responsibility to assure our professional constituencies, and by ex­tension the American people, that such is not the case. We cannot report to our colleagues that Foreign Relations is, as historically it proudly has been, as complete and open a record as possible. We hope so, but we cannot be sure.

Certainly the CDC, on its own or at the behest of other agencies, has pro­posed substantial deletions in manu­scripts presented to it by the historical office. After often lengthy negotiation, many objections have been withdrawn, sometimes when the historical office has shown that the documents are already in the public domain. Occasionally, at least, material deleted in one volume has been, presumably by a different reviewer, permitted to appear in anoth­er. The proportion of material  deleted as a result of this process varies greatly, from the insubstantial to as high as 15 percent.

CDC procedures are cloaked in ob­scurity. We cannot find out how the very general principles established by executive order are in fact applied. If there are guidelines, they are withheld from us. Nor are we permitted to see or to have described to us any of the docu­ments or passages for which clearance has been denied. At the end of the process, reviewers prepare quite specific guidelines for use by the National Archives when considering declassification of papers not included in Foreign Rela­tions, but these too are withheld from us. We are simply asked by the CDC to take its assurances on faith.

Not so long ago, members of the committee spent substantial time look­ing at documents for which clearance had been refused. They came away sat­isfied, and the republic did not col­ lapse-no one betrayed confidences by running to the newspapers. Some move toward past practice, at least, is urgently required, and we will make recommendations in this regard to the Secretary of State.

The Committee, the Office of the Historian, and the Department

The committee noted with gratification that eight volumes of Foreign Rela­tions have been published since its last meeting, the highest output since 1978. We were also pleased to learn that the Office of the Historian has completed compilation of five more volumes, making a total of ten, in the group covering the years 1958–60. The skill and devotion of the office are evident, but we are deeply concerned that inadequate financial resources will impede its work.

As always, during the meeting the committee received helpful assistance from William Z. Slany, the Historian, and his staff, and we also benefited from the useful material circulated in ad­vance. The committee also welcomed the support of George B. High, deputy assistant secretary for public affairs, who attended several of its sessions, and we also received reports on declassifica­tion from Deputy Assistant Secretary John P. Burke and others from CDC.

Present at the committee’s sessions were Blanche Wiesen Cook, Robert Dal­lek, and Warren F. Kuehl, representing the American Historical Association; Deborah Larson and Michel Oksenberg, representing the American Political Sci­ence Association; John Lawrence Har­grove, representing the American Soci­ety of International Law; Bradford Perkins, representing the Organization of American Historians; and Warren I. Cohen and Michael H. Hunt, the first representatives from the Society for Historians of American Foreign Rela­tions. The committee elected Perkins as chairman, succeeding Kuehl, whose term expires this year.