Deputy Undersecretary of State
Washington
May 2, 1955
Dear Mr. Lewis:
I wish to thank you for your kind letter of April 17. I was particularly glad to receive the greetings of my dear friend Mrs. Hathaway, the widow of the late Charles Hathaway, my first chief in the service to whose instruction and friendly guidance I shall always be indebted.
I obtained the impression from reading your letter that you have had a most interesting life, that you have been able to delve into many subjects which have always fascinated me but which I have unfortunately not had an opportunity to study.
I sincerely hope that you will find it possible to use your talents and your accomplishments in the interest of the United States and of a more complete understanding between the peoples of Asia and of the Western world.
I would be grateful if you would send my cordial greetings to Mrs. Hathaway. With kind personal regards,
Sincerely yours,
Loy W. Henderson
Department of State
Washington
February 11, 1957
Dear Mr. Lewis:
I very much appreciated receiving your letter of January 16 regarding your interesting visits to Japan, India, Pakistan, Thailand and Burma. It is always a source of great satisfaction, as you point out, to be able to see not only the leaders but other representative elements of the countries which one visits.
I was glad to have word from you about Mrs. Frances Hathaway and her son. I well remember Dr. Hathaway who was my chief in Dublin, Ireland, in 1922.
Sincerely yours,
Loy W. Henderson
Supreme Court of the United State
Washington 25. D.C.
Chambers of the Chief Justice
April 2, 1957
Dear Mr. Lewis:
It was certainly interesting to read your letter describing the help being given by the University of California to Indian agriculture. My visit there last year convinced me not only of the tremendous potentiality of their agricultural economy but also of the staggering problems they would have to overcome. It is deeply heartening to learn of the progress already made and the programs underway.
Thank you very much for writing me about it. With my best wishes.
Sincerely,
Earl [?]
Office of the Vice President
Washington
June 23, 1958
Dear Mr. Lewis:
I want you to know how much I appreciated your letter of June 15. I can assure you that your constructive comments will be most helpful as I continue my study of Latin American and world problems.
While immediate public attention is understandably focused on the incidents which occurred in Peru and Venezuela, I think it is most important that we not overlook the fact that the great majority of the people of Latin America are basically friendly toward the United States. That is why it is so vital that we do everything we can to strengthen the economic, political, and cultural ties between this country and our neighbors to the South.
In view of your interest, I thought you might like to have a transcript of some remarks I made at the National Press Club on May 21.
With every good wish,
[signed] Richard Nixon
Congress of the United States
Washington
June 18, 1960
Mr. Samuel L. Lewis
c/o E. W. Hathaway
350 76th Street
New York 21, N. Y.
Dear Mr. Lewis:
Thank you very much for your letter of June 17, 1960.
Your observations resulting from your experiences in Japan are very well taken. I do not profess to be an expert on religion and/or morals, but suffice it to say, I think I can distinguish right from wrong.
In our efforts to stress and practice world brotherhood, there are always those whose actions will tend to controvert it. I feel that these are a minority, but there is no getting away from the fact that the minority can do much harm. We can only hope to broaden and strengthen our efforts at spreading world brotherhood, not only to foreign countries, but just as important, right here at home.
In this regard, I commend very highly the fact that Hawaii is hopeful of having established within its boundaries a Center for Cultural and Technical Interchange between East and West where students from both points of the compass may be given the opportunity of better understanding each other.
With all best wishes for your forthcoming trip around the world, I am,
Daniel K. Inoye
American Embassy Karachi
Pakistan
March 6, 1961
The Alien Registration Branch
Police Headquarters,
McLeod Road, Karachi
Dear Sir:
This will introduce Mr. Samuel L. Lewis, an American citizen, holder of United States Passport No. 1919228 issued February 23, 1960 at San Francisco.
Mr. Lewis will be here in Pakistan for approximately 6 months and will proceed to Abbottabad in the near future to assist official and nonofficial institutions in Pakistan under agricultural schemes. Mr. Lewis is uncertain as to his arrival in Abbottabad since he is scheduled to meet official and civil representatives on route at Multan, Lahore and Rawalpindi.
The Embassy would appreciate any assistance which you can render to help Mr. Lewis in completion of his registration papers.
Very truly yours,
John B. Gwynn
American Vice Consul
United States of America
Operations Mission To U.A.R.
22 July, 1961
Mr. Samuel L. Lewis
K482 Kung Street
Abbottabad,
Hazara, West Pakistan
Dear Sam:
I received your letter of the 19th of May about a month later and I have not answered for the reason that we have been resettling a number of farm families in our project.
I am glad to know that you have visited the Soil Conservation and Soil Reclamation offices and have made some Headway with them concerning overall processes involved in these important aspects of agricultural progress. It has been my observation in all of the parts of the world that I have visited that natural resources are looked upon as sort of a gift of God and that therefore it is assumed that they will be continuous regardless of what we do with them. As you know we have been discussing that matter at some length here in Egypt.
I expect to leave Cairo on or about the 19th of August to return to my professorial desk in Berkeley, at which place I would be glad to hear from you in care of the Department of Civil Engineering, Berkeley, 4.
Our resettlement here is going along very evenly and we are happy that we are contributing to the progress of Egypt in this agrarian reform.
Very truly yours,
Paul M. Keim,
Advisor to the Co-Directors of ARIS
American Embassy,
(Consular Division)
New Delhi 21, India,
October 31, 1961
Mr. Samuel L. Lewis,
c/o Major M. Sadiq,
2 Elgin Road,
Lahore, Pakistan.
Sir:
The receipt is acknowledged of your letter of October 25 concerning your mail.
The attached two letters were received yesterday after Mr. Huston Dixon, the American Consul in Lahore, had telephoned the Embassy. If more letters are received for you they will be promptly forwarded.
The normal procedure followed by the Embassy with regard to visitors mail is to keep them for two months. If the visitor concerned does not communicate with the Embassy or call at this office to pick up his mail it is returned to the sender with the remark “unknown”. If any of your mail had been returned to the senders that must have been done before we received your first communication in which you mentioned that some mail may be coming to you in care of the office.
With regard to your Indian visa, it is suggested that you let us know the data of your application to the Indian High Commission in Karachi if you have not already been granted the visa. You should also clearly indicate what were the reasons given in your application for your visit to India.
Very truly yours,
Roger G. Gifford
American Consul
Enclosures: 2 letters
Lahore, Pakistan
December 8, 1961
Embassy U.S.A.
Karachi
Dear Sirs:
Please help me out. Please do something to assist me getting out of this country, anywhere, anyhow. There is more than ample evidence that my mail has been opened. I have had a letter from Washington showing that envelopes were opened and contents changed. I had an important letter from a publisher insisting that my vital reports were never received. My Senators answered promptly letters written in November. No letter between September 18 add October 31 was answered by anybody in Washington, and few elsewhere.
I received one letter yesterday in the Consular Office at Bank Square. It had been opened. The enclosures were removed. It referred to another letter with enclosures, they were never received nor was the letter.
India. Since applying for a Visa from India I have never had a single note excepting through intermediaries. So far as I am personally concerned they simply pocketed my rupees. I don’t believe that happened. I must ask you if it be possible under any condition that I get to India. Even Muslims here are permitted to go as pilgrims.
I have not had any answer to any letter from India, even those sent by registered mail, with the single exception of Dr. Radhakrishnan. I am now compelled to ask others to write for me and also for the Embassy there to enquire.
Neither have I had any reply to my enquiry for Ceylon. Neither have I had any answer from my travel agent about the alternate matter of returning to the United States. Mr. Dixon has now sent by official such a letter to my attorney. I have never heard from him either. In this I have asked him to contact the travel agent.
I have a surplus of Indian Rupees. It I cannot get to that country I shall have to come to Karachi and intercede with my principals, the Bank of America. I am not worried there for they always have been most cooperative ant I can raise funds easily if they are not offhand available.
I have been forced to report again and again names to Mr. Dibble here but the FBI warned me long ago never to counter-espionage or anything and I do not. I get these names through others who are my friends.
I should like any kind of a letter whatsoever from the Indian High Commission. I also ask that you reply in duplicate, one through Mr. Dixon and one to this address 2 Elgin Road.
Previously letters from you to me, purportedly sent to this address did not arrive, but I saw the file copy in the office on Bank Square. Other things have happened which I should, be glad to relate to your political attaché.
The chief compensations are that my friends are caring for me at little cost and both my agricultural and cultural missions have succeeded entirely and sooner or later they are going to be reported in tots, or if your attaches will listen-which they have not before—to them. Any American who is successful here is naturally an impediment in way of certain powers, or conspiracies.
Faithfully,
Samuel L. Lewis
Lahore, Pakistan
December 30, 1961
Hon. Thomas Kuchel,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D. C.
Attention: Ewing Hass, Administrative Assistant
Dear Mr. Hass:
I am arranging to fly to Karachi for a few days. One of the chief reasons for this is to report to officials of the U.S. Government as to what I have learned from contacts with the new Agricultural Development Corporation.
My immediate personal survey in this country has been completed and I think I may have written especially on the theme of how California can help this part of the world. I have the entire good-will of the O.I.C. and research workers from American universities in this regard. But I am free to travel and meet and do.
In U.A.R. there is a top organization, the National Research Institute, which coordinates all the work of scientists in that country. Here the new Corporation is distinctly dominated by retired officials, few if any of whom are scientists. Again the National Research Institute of U.A.R. has been financed by the Egyptian Government. Here they are depending on foreign aid, particularly American aid.
I am sending a copy of this to the “Saturday Evening Post” because: they have been writing and editorializing on the lessons(?) from Pearl Harbor. One lesson we have not learned is to accept reports and warnings from little people. I don’t want to go into the past. But here I see our government generously appropriating loans and aids for other lands without always having any sort of auditing or administrating. General Maxwell Taylor found out the hard way what all we “bum” tourists knew from direct experience but such direct experiences are not made matters of record, nor are they given any recognition in reaching official decisions.
On the negative side I might be protesting because I am getting no help—I have not asked for any from our government. I am returning next year with a number of projects. As a matter of fact a friend of mine is now in Lodi, collecting Avocado and Pear seeds for this land—his own expense. But the new Agricultural Development Corporation is not collecting seeds or anything—it is for the moment just providing high level jobs—our expense, if we do not watch out.
I have at this writing had directly, first hand, three reports of actual technicians being turned down to make way for friends of the new administrators. Ibis, of course, is being appealed and every effort will be made to see the proper personnel is selected.
Lahore
May 18, 1962
Attention: Technical Advisor
Dear Senator Kuchel:
With further reference to “How California Can Help Asia.” I am now making every effort to return home soon, a matter which is quite delicate because there is off the record a 50-50 chance of meeting President Ayub made even more delicate because the manner in which this may be done is so totally outside the region of respected protocol that its very acknowledgement may cause a “revolution.” Fortunately I have had nothing but the whole-hearted cooperation of all political attachés whomsoever and whatsoever. Although I try to stay outside of internal politics we are in agreement that what the United States needs is reality and not what is called “realism”—a term whose exact meaning escapes me.
The most successful and happy interviews have been help with scientists and members of the Ministry of Food & Agriculture. Not only do they include all my proposals, but they have also accepted two completely new, or additional ideas.
One involves the cleaning of our cities of waste chemicals and using these as soil amendments or additives wherever they could bring betterment. One does not need the pure chemical in such operations as one needs in the laboratory or foundry.
The other is to bring closer rapport between Husbandry, as well as Horticulture, to fill out complete Agricultural program. My contacts will be easy with the Dairy Industry in Marin, the Poultry industry in Petaluma; and through Russell Smith Jr.. San Benito, for the Cattle industry. I think this would complete a well-rounded paper on “How California Can Help the Orient.”
The above ideas and projects will be discussed beforehand with my friend, Harry Nelson, City College, San Francisco; and with Mr. James Wilson, Information Section, Chamber of Commerce—or with whomsoever he may introduce me to.
Yesterday I ran haphazardly into three more Californians and the grape-vine brought no needed information. Our present method of foreign aid has many loopholes and the greatest of these is the difficulty in which some of these loopholes could be easily plugged. For example I have faith that the “Peace Corps” was rather emotionally thrust on a lot of people without asking them what they wanted or needed. It has brought the result of displacing Asia Foundation (and others) from certain “neutralist” lands and the good-work they started has dead-ended.
“What will I do for money?” “My dear man, you are doing to be very rich. You will have all the gold you want. I am going to initiate you into the mysteries of Alchemy. You can get all the gold you want.” After that the Major said. “Yes, but if this is so, why aren’t you rich?” “I am rich. To begin with I was a capitalist and financier. I had all I wanted one way. But when I was given this gift I gave up the worldly wealth. I don’t need it. I can have it whenever I wish you. Now it is up to you to see that you and your family are rich. After your family gets money then you may give to the poor and orphans.
The remarkable thing about this is that I gave the Major exactly the same prediction previously but not the Alchemy. This means we are on the verge of tests to see whether this spiritualism is a mighty act and science or a fraud. I feel like on a delicate balance.
Today we want over all the predictions by whomsoever and they all predict the same thing. It means that these seers are going to be either 100% right or 100% wrong. This is far more delicate for the Major than for me. Senator Kuchel had acknowledged my paper on “How California Can Help the Orient” an all the American officials approve of it. Furthermore yesterday while I was wandering around red tape land—the police, consulate and American Express, I kept on running into Californians and got some more important information a la grapevine. If I were to announce it here all the press would damn me and call me a spy, but I know what is going on.
We make the same mistake all over and all over again too. Financing wealthy politicians does not stem the communists or help the country. Now it is either a subsidy or outright blackmail. We don’t win because if anybody is dissatisfied they either kick us out (as in Burma) or call the Russians in, as in Cuba. What is more the press does not want valid reports and I doubt if the CIA cares.
The unanimity of conferences with technicians goes on. Not a cough in ten
carloads, but I doubt whether I could get the local papers or radio stations to
take this. They have their methods which always end in the further loss of
goodwill in the unaligned countries. On top of that Julie Medlock has gone to
Ghana (God bless her) to attend a monster protest meeting against all this
unclear nonsense which is going to impoverish and win no wars. The protestants
are undoubtedly right but does this mean anything at all? I am waiting now to
see whether the Sufis, having overloaded us with blessing and prophecies, bring
any of this into action. It is high noon and I may not mail this for several
days, adding any report of the Major; or after tomorrow, from the Sufis of
Sarawallah, etc. You can understand near skepticism, or else if there is a
break such a fairy-like fantasy as to be unbelievable. I hate to let people
down for even if the big things turn out to be hoaxes, my accomplishments have
been far more than ordinarily one man achieves.
A number of these matters and others will be discussed with your successor in San Francisco; and if I can get at him, with S. Itaat Hussain in Karachi. But I am not going to be stopped by failures. My spiritual mission is to see the people of certain lands are well fed, and to adopt proper soil and crop correctives which may make this so. The absence of recognition or appreciation is of no account. I am called upon to act and not depend upon encomiums.
But my main obstacle at the moment is the utter failure to have any serious consideration given to the sending abroad of qualified envoys who can spread the knowledge of this land on all levels, who can travel more than the present consular officials can, and who could and would serve Pakistan in any and all capacities in given areas, not possible for your colleagues to handle.
Specifically I have longer reports to make on Salinity, Salt Water Conversion, Hillside planting, Soil correction, etc. Not only that, I know exactly what to do and intend to do it, inshallah.
I have recently run into Khalid in Rawalpindi. He has matured considerably and now looks more like a man than a boy. But I agree that it would be wonderful if he could continue his education in my country. He is a partial “misfit” here and I know you know that even in San Francisco there are institutions into which he would fit very well and find himself on a higher level. Incidentally I know of so many careers wherein Pakistan is totally lacking in artists and technicians but do not wish to go into that here.
Sincerely,
S.A.M.
Sufi Ahmed Murad
Samuel L. Lewis
1088 Fulton St
San Francisco 17, CA
August 1, 1963
Edward A. Karnacki,
Office of Public Services,
Bureau of Public Affairs,
Department of State,
Washington 25, D.C.
My dear Mr. Karnacki:
I must thank you for year acknowledge of the 29th and for the enclosure, the address of Honorable Roger Hillsman, assistant Secretary of State. The fact remains, my dear sir, that we remain in a peculiar position, heralding on the one hand the marvelous ideology of democracy (with which I fully agree) and at the same time the simple citizen has no opportunity whatsoever to warn his country of real dangers. We have learned nothing from Pearl Harbor and the long address of the Hon. Hillsman proves just that.
I am enclosing copy of a letter sent to the Editor of some San Francisco papers because he is scheduled to take part in a panel before the World affairs Council of Northern California next month. The editors, especially those of the metropolitan dailies, are notorious in refusing interviews or papers or letters submitted by Americans who have been on the spot and are just as active in spreading rumors from European sources as if they were actual factual material.
For example, recently one of the papers here put on a full front page article that the communist nations were using telepathy and other extra-sensory faculties in the cold war. I don’t know whether the communists nations are using such faculties but I do know that my own colleagues are and I know about the trouble between China and Russia long ago, and could only report it after the mob attack on our Embassy at Cairo because warnings, valid warning of real citizens are shunned and off-the-beat proposals of so-called “allies” are taken seriously.
(At the moment some of my contacts have been called to Washington by Mr. Herter on most serious undertakings showing just what our “allies” are in times of crises—but otherwise the Mr. John Doe of the U.S. is caught when he contradicts an “ally” even in re: communism.)
The most pregnant statement in the Hon. Hillsman’s speech is the statement: “The United States is determined that Communism shall not take over Asia.”
It should stand out as it is if it were not contradicted so many times by the speaker himself.
My own basic information from Laos and S.E. Asia came from the late Phra Sumangalo (Robert Clifton) who lived in both sections, worked for the governments thereof and was refused all appointments or interviews with the State Department and the press (Mrs. Meyer excepted), until on a second visit, because of a family connections he met Senator Fulbright.
Buddhism. While there was trouble in S.E. Asia I tried in vain to get a paper read or published on “The Buddhism of Vietnam.” We had our “experts” on Buddhism here, all NATO nationals excepting one poet who has had a hectic career—these were our “experts” and recently when a student of these and others went to a real Buddhist conference of real Buddhists she came back and told me she did not know what they were talking about.
We now have some Buddhists here from Taiwan and if anybody every looked over their Buddhism it would be radically different from the hodge-podge over given Americans, Japan today slightly excepted.
I met one of the spiritual leader of the Vietnamese. I was told I was taking death in my hands. I wanted to serve my country. The end result was exactly the opposite of the prediction. He embraced me and loaded me with gifts because I know and understood his faith.
Today I am on the research staff of the Encyclopedia of Buddhism and not a single NATO national living in this country is, but one American living in Japan is. I did refuse to attend the services in behalf of the martyrs, but the fact is the Hon. Hillsman’s remarks concerning Diem are as far out as possible, American soldiers are dying and will continue to die and we will do anything in Asia except treating backward Asians as full human beings. (Unless there is a change.)
Islam. I notice that there has also concluded a conference on Islam in Utah. As usual, it is not necessary to have a collation of Pakistanis, Arabs and Indonesians, but it is necessary (only in America) to have various NATO scholars—if you go to the Mosque and see the Imam there you will get a very different story. Why we ignore the Chief Imam and include NATO scholars is something not only incomprehensible to Asians but downright offensive.
I have now four times unwittingly been in communist nests. My colleagues (see the letter) gave me the complete story of the subversive method of sending Muslims into mosques to mingle with devotees and incite them against the United States. They have been helped no end by our policy of supporting “Diems” over people of other faiths.
The worst thing is the story—which can be corroborated—of our unwittingly joining in a conspiracy against ourselves wherein oil exploration is not going on in Pakistan. If we had a real CIA they would examine my story beginning with the last communist imbroglio which is at least on record in Lahore. These are not things to be used in party politics but they weaken all the emotional, unsemantic oratory which wins no battles on the international scene.
It is too bad that the fine words of President Kennedy which the Assistant Secretary of State quotes towards the end of his speech are contradicted in the context. The President may take about “unless it has an educated citizenry whose qualities of mind and heart permit it to take part in the complicated and increasingly sophisticated decisions….” When I was in Lahore in 1961 and had Thanksgiving Dinner with all your colleagues on every level I was the only person present who knew the history of the country.
I have addressed 80,000 (eighty thousand) persons at public meetings in Pakistan and this does not include those whom I met socially at all levels from common workingmen to cabinet officials and the family of President Ayub. The principal of the Islamabad University which I temporarily represent here is the spiritual teacher of Ayub. He is also the leader of the anti-communist underground. In Pakistan Mr. Bhutto is on the march and we meet him with oratory. I met those of that view with something else. I was successful.
I was also successful in turning a mob against communist hecklers in India.
I was also the first simple person to be admitted with a guard of honor to the Imperial Palace Grounds in Japan.
Etc.
I am still for God and country despite all the oratory. The world cannot remain half free and half dialectic.
Faithfully,
Samuel L. Lewis
(Sufi Ahmed Murad Chisti)
P.S. This is written with vehemence but not with rancor. I am busy writing “How California Can Help Asia” showing that this State can help millions of peoples far more than all the red nations conceived.
58 Harriet St.,
San Francisco 3, Calif.
February 22, 1964
Hon. Thomas H. Kuchel
Senator Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
Dear Senator Kuchel:
In re: the private citizen and foreign affairs.
This is an excellent day to commemorate our first President, God bless his soul. Today we orate and ignore whatever he stood for. Despite our constitution and all our valid documents the Under Secretary of State has informed us that our future policy in S.E. Asia would result from a consortium with our allies. A psychiatrist would call it schizophrenia—consulting with our allies, these Nations large and small who trade with Cuba and recognize Mainland China. Soon we shall hear from the small nations meeting at Zagreb and Bandung what they think of our “consorting with our allies” to determine their futures.
The whole history of S.E. Asia is marked by an insistent and determined program of ignoring citizens who have lived in situ and have more than the requirements set forth in “The Ugly American.” This book is fine for the small fry. It sets standards for the small clerk and any obstreperous person who wants to give some real information about real Asia. It was from the very beginning ignored by the authors, by the entire press who praised the book to no end, and also by the officials who want their subalterns to know everything in it. Thus I have found subalterns in some countries too busy reading “The Ugly American” to find time to mingle with the nationals—fact, not sarcasm.
And now we send out not a diplomat, not an “Ugly American” but the Attorney- General to mediate, or interfere with the of affairs of Asian nations and Asian human beings for which in he has any qualifications. One wonders which set of civil service requirements list them.
The fact is Senator, that the small citizen can neither inform nor warn. It was so at the time of Pearl Harbor, it is so today. And having been in the confidence of intelligence officials of a number of Asian lands nobody knows it better than myself.
Now the President has selected another official to look for new talent and new ideas. I am not writing. Not a single letter to any branch of the State Department answered, and I represent directly and indirectly far more persons than there are people in the United States and can prove it!
58 Harriet St
San Francisco 3, Calif.
March 18, 1964
Arthur J. Waterman Jr.,
Office of Public Services,
Bureau of Public Affairs,
Department of State,
Washington, D.C.
Dear Mr. Waterman:
I wish to thank you for your acknowledgment of the 12th.
1. Blockage in Communication. This is major problem in world affairs today and there is very little likelihood of any change in the international situation until there is more candor in this field.
I have on innumerable occasions been asked by Asians, and usually V.I.P.s in the respective countries to make inquiries either to governmental agencies or to important institutions and the failure to obtain even acknowledgments is very great indeed. Unfortunately the Asians, excepting for Japan and the Philippines, tend to blame the United States Government and the State Department for all failures in this respect. And we, on our part, tend to be “shocked” every time an Embassy or USIS building is mobbed and no attempt has been made to clarify the situation. Of course the State Department is not usually (sometimes it is) to blame.
On the other hand I have had nothing but very prompt acknowledgements from all other governmental departments in this regard, and this without exception. Also full cooperation from them.
2. Cultural Exchange. There is very little attention paid to letters sent at the behest of leading institutions in Asia. The Government of the United States is not to blame, of course, if we say that Harvard—and this school is especially named—does not answer letters or refuses to accept credentials. Yet at Harvard we find Profs. Gibbs and Cantwell Smith neither of whom are Americans, teaching what pertains to be “Islamic Culture,” which has no existence on this earth and bears no resemblance to anything that ever did exist.
Islam may be an unacceptable religion but we should know what it is in all its facets in dealings with human beings, this country pretending to represent democracy.
This comes at a time when a number of our scientists are taking unusual interest in underground waters. But there is a grave question whether underground waters and diversions would meet the needs of the day.
I am, of course, emotionally affected by the fires in the Los Angeles area coming, at all times, in the presently moist spring; with a certain fear of impending danger from this source while public attention is elsewhere.
For the moment it is enough to know that attention is aroused. If it be aroused enough it may be possible to have the various nations of the Near East sit down with Americans to discuss first the particular needs or wants of their country and then go on to policy. My diary does not contain all the particular requests of the leaders of Arab lands, but we have failed to sit down and talk with them on simple, elementary levels.
In the case of Pakistan, after we refused to meet these nationals at the simple elementary level, they were quite willing to confer with the Chinese. It may be out of the province of AFME to hold any such conferences but I think it is right to place pressure on real ground table meetings with nationals of the countries where AFME is functioning, and to pursue this principle to the end.
Faithfully,
Samuel L. Lewis
772 Clementina St.,
San Francisco 3, Calif.
April 14, 1964
Hon. Hubert M. Humphrey
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D. C.
Attention: Technical Advisor
Dear Senator Humphrey:
In re: “No Need for Hunger.” By agreement with Jonathan Garst I went into parts of the world where he did not go and carried his plans until I happened upon the Ford Foundation people. And there is an extreme difference between the Ford Foundation and “Foreign Aid” (in the general sense, beyond institutions), that the Foundation comes to grip with realities and accepts people who come to grip with realities and the others accept credentials and more credentials and the more money we spend the less friendship we gain because we do not come to grip with realities.
There is going to be a “Food and Civilization” conference here next month. I have established friendship with Wm. Vogt and also as a representative of foreign institutions (not as an American) I expect to attend. But the last such conference attended here, I did not have “credentials” (our standards) and upended all the speakers who were too busy fighting each other anyhow. And abroad I was not excluded from any conference, any level on food, soil and water problems. Besides, our Technical Expert, Mr. Ayres, came from Rome to Cairo to see what I was doing. Which he thoroughly approved. Unfortunately our Foreign Service is largely in the hands of the State Department and not the technical services. This means an “ugly American” approach, meaning that the smaller echelons must study this fiction so have no time to mingle with nationals while the Agricultural people are overburdened because they have discovered one reality which is totally foreign from the State Department, that eighty percent of the populace are or want to be land-owners and food producers. No foreign policy of any large nation has been based on this absolute reality.
Today I am working on a themes “How California Can Help Asia” and I am amazed at the amount of research and the personnel in this State who among them have solved practically every problem I met in Asia save that of finance. Oh, I can name the persons and the research and the bulletins and all that. And I have met perhaps half a million Asians (I mean people, not brain-children of diplomats and newspaper men) and hope to God we will occasionally meet them as human beings, if not as equals.
I do not wish to carry this theme further here. I only hope that someday we shall get out of “realism” into reality. Why I have friends here who know means of tripling the food supply of S.E. Asia—but we are too busy making pawns of human beings to bother.
Faithfully,
Samuel L. Lewis
772 Clementina St.,
San Francisco 3, Calif.
December 21, 1965
Hon. Wayne Morse,
Senate Office Bldg.,
Washington 25, D.C.
Dear Senator Morse:
Mission to Rawalpindi and Islamabad.
It is characteristic of our times that one has to read of your movements and mission in a foreign land, and important though it may be, it does not stand even in third place to “expert” Reston of the New York Times and to several reports which contradict Reston and appear in the more astute Christian Science Monitor. Yet it is in view of these personal, dialectic subjectivities that our “news” is determined, our public discussions on “foreign affairs” is determined, our public discussions on “foreign of actual history.
I should appreciate any copy of report from you that is made public. On the surface I am the American representative of the University of Islamabad, President Ayub being on the Board of Regents. The acting President is Ayub’s spiritual teacher (Pir Dewwal Shereef) and the fact that this university was conceived as a bastion of pro-Americanism and anti-communism has been given very little consideration in this land. Why is this? Why can’t a loyal American citizen report to the State Department or be given any consideration by the press? The fact that Reston & Co. be given so much space here and that your Honorable self is given so many space abroad lies at the very nexus of our failure of the moment.
There is nothing more deluding that the applause an audience gives to an orator who talks about “winning the hearts of men.” This applause evokes no response abroad and the favorable attention to it here is closely connected with the reason why in fact (no relation to the same words used by editors) that we are at a low ebb in the hearts of men.
We are at a low ebb because it is evident to nearly all non-Americans from Arnold Toynbee to President Ayub himself that we are far more determinant in making some people more equal than others, far more than the most rabid communist can conceive. Everything supports the contention that we have the two cultures of Lord Snow.
Without going into details, this person has been doing research on the real problems of real Pakistan and all efforts have so far, without a single exception, been accepted by the Department of Agriculture and snubbed by the State Department—the same facts, the same information, the same everything. But as this conclusion was reached years ago in a meeting with Dr. Bryan, one of our top USIA men, human nature has not changed—the scientists accept the facts reported and the “other culture” measures the person and ignores the facts.
At the present time all efforts of a retired citizens are concerned with (a) Solution of food problems beginning with the thesis: “How California Can Help Asia”; (b) Reconciliation between Pakistan and India.
As to the first there has been nothing but cooperation and cordiality outside the State Department, the press and a goodly number of “social scientists” (these are divided). Whether it be problems of water supply, aridity, salinity, food production, etc. with a very few exceptions the answers can be obtained here in California—research, practical application, men who have answers, etc. But I fear, and I do fear, that the State Department and large section of the press wish to win “the hearts of men” abroad by dialectics rather than example and the human beings who occupy Asian lands want examples and not counter-Marxist dialectics.
As to the peace-feelers. I have already been at one special session on Kashmir and was sent to India on a peace mission, totally and absolutely rejected by our foreign services with a lot of warnings. They never inquired why I was so trusted and whom I knew. The fact that I am a fellow disciple with Ayub Khan of a great Pakistani spiritual teacher; that I am a devoted reader of President Radhakrishnan’s writing and that he accepts my interpretation of both Buddhism and Hinduism at levels hardly taught in the United States does not detract from knowledge or information. The World Congress of Faiths in London has just thanked me for “solving” some problems in this field, and today our university problems have about three high level organization working at objectivity in disputed areas of Orientals.
The awkward thing at the moment, Mr. Senator, is that a very highly placed diplomat of a non-aligned country is coming to San Francisco shortly to collaborate on what I call a peace-and-conciliation program. When I was in Lahore in 1961, having a Thanksgiving dinner with our foreign service I was the only one present who knew the history of the back country. I have spoken to multitudes of Pakistanis at all levels. My diaries attest and have already been requested by one of the institutions of a leading university in this section.
The question resolves to how far can we accept the late President Kennedy’s dictum: “It is not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country.” Mr. Senator, try it—I have been within and ace of being what the legendary John Birch has become and no nonsense about it. It is only because I am closely connected with top Asian groups—whose very existence we ignore, that I am alive today.
What is one supposed to do about such matters? Have you any available reports?
Faithfully,
Samuel L. Lewis
772 Clementina St.,
San Francisco 3, Calif.
January 15, 1966
Hon. Thomas H. Kuchel,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D. C.
Dear Senator Kuchel:
Leave it to “Weaver” Kosygin
Well, the Russians have succeeded in bringing the Indians and Pakistanis together. Why not? What did we do?
In 1962 the writer was sent on a peace-feeler mission between the two countries involved. All he got was a good calling down from our foreign service and an absolute refusal on their part to attend functions public and not so public.
In 1964 we had a seminar on “Asia” in these parts, no Chinese and no Muslims of any kind. We are going to have one again soon.
Now while we are discussing something we call “ Vietnam” and proposing all kinds of things, Her Serene Highness, Princess Poon Diskul, President of the “World Buddhist Federation, has called on His Holiness, Pope Paul.
Must our “realism” continue to ignore realities? Are we going to cognize this meeting between heads of two great religions or are we going to leave it to Kosygin to settle the fate of the Vietnamese also?
Faithfully,
Samuel L. Lewis
772 Clementina St.,
San Francisco 3, Calif.
February 8, 1966
Hon. Thomas H. Kuchel,
6315 Senate Office Building, Washington 25, D.C.
Dear Senator Kuchel:
How California Can Help Asia: Pragmatics Versus Dialecticians
One must thank you for your letter of January 31 with your splendid address of January 27 before the graduates at UCLA. I have just returned from another visit to that campus with from my point of view total satisfaction. Years ago I had the choice between enrolling there (upon retirement) and going to Asia. The death of the late Prof. Von Grünebaum and a sudden invitation to Japan determined later events in life. But I am watching this institution grow physically, culturally and spiritually.
A number of years ago I was involved in “World Peace Through the Arts.” Circumstances have given me introductions to areas where neither research specialists nor adventurers have gone and an entente has been made separately with the Departments of Art and Ethnomusicology which may in time tighten the bonds—now loosed between real Asia and real America.
I say “loosed” because this country has deserted its traditional pragmatism for anti-Marxist dialectics. And one having opened that door to dialectics we invite even communists to speak—to show that we accept “free speech” while holding the doors tight against Asians and “Ugly Americans.”
Years ago when the University of California at Berkeley started a series of seminars on “Asia” I envisioned the professors from the different departments on the different campuses coming together to share their common real knowledge. Alas it has not been. They are as excluded as this representative of several real Asian movements and institutions with the addition that any noise on their parts may lead to recriminations. Instead we have the representatives of the dialectical movements of “left,” “center,” and “right,” and a good Briton or Australian, if he is not too conservative, may speak on “Asia” where Americans and Asians are alike excluded. (This is not nonsense and in a terrible accusation which can easily be proved to be true.) And soon I shall address the President, Clark Kerr, not to accept this person as a represent of anything Asian, but to accept his own “underling” who have among and between them nearly all the real answers to the real problems of the real Orient.
While thoroughly critical of the dialectical policies of this Administration one feels even more aghast at the equally dialectical and quite pompous views of ivory towered commentators. Their position is worse because they champion a “democracy” which consists of essays on democracy and an absolute refusal to listen to the experiences and knowledge of other, whereas the President at least may listen though he will not be effected or affected any more than these very divergent dia1ectical commentators.
Recently I have watched the personal attrition to Hon. Roger Hillsman, now at Columbia, who has my complete sympathy; and to President Johnson, who has not. One is compelled to agree with Mr. Hillsman who is offering us almost the dying echoes of good old American Pragmatism from one of the heart-centers of that splendid philosophy. This universe, this post-Einsteinian universe cannot be Procrustead into a left-center-right arena of the dialecticians and that is what we nearly all are doing. But the voice of Roger Hillsman, not particularly dominant today, may go up, not down in history as an honest effort to use traditional American methods and not the willy-nilly European dialectics which dominates almost in to the press, the channels of communication and everything outside the scientific arenas.
If you had attended the meetings of the scientists (AAAS) at Berkeley, you would have listened to concordant parades of actual materials presented by all sorts of persons, not only PhDs but dirt farmers, who had no time to offer eulogies on “democracies” before telling us their valid experiences and researches.
I returned to this city to attend a meeting on Vietnam, any relation to seminars and colloquia elsewhere being totally absent. Deploring the absence of Orientals, the meeting soon came under the domination of us “Ugly Americans.” Although “Sarkhan” was hardly mentioned, the discussion was in this spirit facts were welcomed, peoples who lived in the area under dispute were given full opportunity to express their experiences first, and opinions came later.
Although it was rather “Dove” like, the feeling was that withdrawal should be militarily and not culturally and spiritually. One deplores our total dependence on either administration views or the caustic remarks of Ivory-Tower commentators and the total ignorance of the Mekong Valley Development Scheme. The hours spent with Prof. Orr of our same UCLA illustrate perfectly what I mean, have meant and intend to do.
To withdraw our military power and restrain ourselves culturally has no value. Actually we have a lot of learn from the Vietnamese (and all other Asians) and for that reason I prefer “Asia Foundation” to others because that is what they do. “Asian Foundation” is, in the sense of this communication a “Pragmatic” and USIA and to some extent the “Peace Corps” are dialectic institutions. Our incessant praise of them veils the reactions of foreigners to them. We are even afraid of praise from exotics, we want to do things and praise them highly as if this proved anything.
The totally unsemantic policies from Washington recently do not obviate a real study of real problems of real Asia and their solutions. One has been successful in the visit to the “Dry Lands Research” department at UCR and now has the materials stemming from the Sahara Reclamation project whose former secretary is at Escondido. Bringing those threads together, one integrates and it is in this spirit of integration one works.
Indeed Prof. Oliver Reiser of Pittsburgh U., champion of integration, will soon be here and one hopes and wishes that his point of view will be more accepted. Like myself also was a disciple of the late Cassius Keyser of Columbia, heart-center of Pragmatism.
I am exceedingly serious about a real conference on real Asia where the various professors of the Six Campuses can come together and let their findings be made public. If even a small amount of funds were at my disposal I would do it myself (a secretary would be needed). But I have other commitments and unlike the commentators I know the truth is in the hands of many individuals and not of this ego-self. Nor do I go around and substitute preaching the word “democracy” while ignoring all it connotes.
Indeed one of the UCLA projects in connection with the Art Department will go very far toward promoting real cultural exchange with real Asia without involving a lot of politics—and hokum. This is, of course, a side-line to efforts in agriculture and engineering. And the position is peculiar because there is an “escalation” between personal meetings with the splendid men who dominate class-rooms and laboratories, but do not dominate channels of communication. And in this is the source of the downfall of an America which has come to reject “Americanism.”
As my present efforts deal mostly with the food-problems of India and the Pakistan-Indian relations this is consuming more of time and effort. But so far as Vietnam is concerned and all of Southeast Asia, I am not needed at all. Just because one can make noise does not endow one with wisdom, or even knowledge.
True, the problems of Southeast Asia have been discussed and agreements have been reached with her Serene Highness, Princess Poon Diskul, President of the World Buddhist Federation; and with Dr. Radhakrishnan, President of India. Both of those have been involved in anti-communist undergrounds in which as a person I have played a considerable part. But we do not want anti-communists if they are dialecticians. We have nothing to do with the masses of Asia who are too spiritual to be communists, but not so spiritual that our editors, our commentators, our “experts” do not call them “communists” because they are neither dialecticians nor dualists. Despite the dictum of the late President Kennedy there is nothing worse than to play the role of a real “Ugly American” in this real world, to associate with and win the love and friendship of exotic people.
The end of this letter can be found in “Sarkhan.” Perhaps fiction will succeed when honesty, factualism and eye-witnessing have no part.
Faithfully,
Samuel L. Lewis
772 Clementina St.,
San Francisco 3,you’re w Calif.
March 27, 1966
Hon. Hubert H. Humphrey,
Vice-President of the United States,
Washington, D.C.
Dear Mr. Vice-President:
“We are tragically short of experts and diplomats on Asia.”
The late revered President of the United States (Hon. John F. Kennedy) said: “It is not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country.” You are a high official of this government; it is easy for high officials to whip out maxims and shibboleths. But what about the ordinary citizen who tries to fulfill them. It is via dolorosa.
At a class of tie University of California, Anthropology Department, the teacher suddenly brought up the subject of Pakistan the other day and then threw the subjects to the writer who was permitted to speak for over one hour. “I have met over one thousand women behind the Purdha.” “How is that possible” “I am regarded as half a holy man.” The teacher then interposed, “Who was your model?” “The late Sir Richard Burton.” The teacher then gave a talk on Burton and threw the subject back to the writer who explained how by following Burtonian tactics it was easy and simple to mingle with Asian (and perhaps other) nationals. But this person has not gone beyond UAR, where incidentally it took him five days to become a guest of the government.
The writer has met in person perhaps half a million Asian people, and naturally having bizarre experiences, it is not easy to have them accepted. For instance he has been three times in Communist nests, and they are not at all like the reports from our editors, whether the narrow Hearst or the broad N.Y. Times type. In every case our thoughts about Asians dominate over objectivity.
This whole thing was thrashed out long ago with one of the top USIA officials and again at a party the other night where one discussed with AID people that no matter how great the accomplishments of AID (and there have been marvelous accomplishments) there is practically no publicity and no matter how small the plans (plans, not accomplishments) of the “Peace Corps” they are published all over. With this policy, Mr. Vice-President, how does one know whether there are any “experts” on Asia?
You will notice from my card that in this country one represents the University of Islamabad. The President-Prime Minister of Pakistan, the Hon. Ayub Khan is on the Board of Directors and when he retires or is removed from office he intends to do an “Eisenhower” (Columbia career). This does not mean that one is accepted therefor, or has even the right to free speech at assemblages (you will get some details below).
Actually Hon. Ayub Khan and the writer share in a spiritual teacher, who is also the Founder of the University and the leader of the pro-Americans in Pakistan. Neither the State Department nor the Peace Corps have accepted this as fact and have refused to answer any correspondence. This, unfortunately, is the general attitude in this country and a single term, used in today’s paper concerning the flying saucers (?) flippancy. Flippancy dominates the Press, the channels of communication of many branches of the State Department and numerous other agencies, private and public.
The writer has lost a two year battle trying to get the University of California and World Affairs Council to have come Asians as speakers at their conference on “Asia.” Last year we were left at the end of the sessions on “Asia” and “China” respectively with the Hobson-choice of an editor of doubtful veracity (and his wife) and a British communist! The audience was given that choice and this unfortunately is characteristics of so much of our “only in America” panel-discussions on something called “Asia.” There are about ten Asian Consulates here in San Francisco not one has been represented at these seminars(?)
Pakistan. The writer has spoken to audiences amounting to about eighty thousand (80,000), people in that land. He was given plenty of publicity. All reports to all shades of the press were rejected here. What was happening simply could not happen. And today I am very, very much afraid that when I return to that country and tell them any incident there will be the fomentation of an anti-American riot. I have been behind the scenes, Mr. Vice-President, I have mingled with these people at all levels and I was able to convince the official historian at Princeton of this, to have him correct some most erroneous statements. If the first book had been published as written all our USIA installations and the Embassy would have been sacked.
Religion. Anti-defamation is wonderful, for Christians and Jews. Brotherhood is wonderful, for Christians and Jews.
Japan. One became the guest of the late Baron Nakashima, the “King-Maker.” One was the first American to be a guest at the Royal Cemetery. (I think it is called Taicho), and the Imperial Grounds, both the Household and Botanical. One was the first outsider to the Buddha-Stupa on Mount Takao.
One was admitted without waiting to the Engaku-ji Monastery at Kamakura, and passed Zen tests immediately (see below). And then one was sent on an anticommunist mission to all Buddhist countries, ending with Hon. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan and on route being the guest of my very good friend, Her Serene Highness, Princess Poon Diskul. Fortunately on this errand some Asia Foundation people were aware, but all other such errands were ignored by our Foreign Service.
Buddhism. I’ll skip over this lightly. We have two real experts on real Buddhism in this country, Dr. Richard Robinson of Wisconsin University, now happily accepted by most American scholars in Asiatic; and Dr. Phillip Eidmann, PhD from Minnesota U. (One does not know if this is your Alma Mater but one doubts whether you know this genius.)
Vietnam. This is the most deplorable situation in all history where two groups of agitated Americans are at each other’s throats without having any clear idea, and often without any idea at all about what they are talking about. If there is anything worse than the Hawks who are anti-Christ in so many respects, it is the parade-doves who have no consideration at all for either Buddhism or Vietnamese people.
“Sarkhan” appears as fiction. It is based on so many facts, a few of my own life, described in my memories, and many in the lives of my closest friend who died of a broken heart trying to prevent hostilities in Vietnam. He has already been given a large article in the forthcoming Encyclopedia of Buddhism and statues are going up in his name in various parts of S.E. Asia. We heralded “The Ugly American,” we are afraid of “Sarkhan,” and we know next to nothing of either Islam or Buddhism.
Grand Master Seo of Korea is now in Honolulu. He looked over all the so-called Buddhists of this region, than ordained the writer as He-Kwang, requested my autobiography and the last report is that the first section has already been published in Korea. So like the original real ugly American, one becomes a sort of Lafcadio Hearn.
India 1956. Just one incident will be given. The writer was present when Master Tara Singh acceded to Prime Minister Nehru. I was the only outsider present and all my efforts at getting an article published have failed. The other day I did meet the head of the Sikh Community here who accepted this incident and we talked with clarity about the present Punjab imbroglio, of which we get many nonsense versions.
Peace Mission. In 1962 I was sent on a peace-feeler mission between Pakistan and India for which I was soundly berated by our Foreign Office. They also refused to attend any functions. I have written an introductory letter to Ambassador Goldberg, not followed up.
One entered India when introductions were difficult (January 24, 1962) because of preparations for Independence Day (January 26) and saw immediately the Chief of Protocol, the President, the Chief Holy Man of the Sufis and the Chief Holy Man of the Vedantas and then left Delhi. This does not make one an expert, or diplomat, Mr. vice-president, it only makes one a gadfly or annoyance.
Three incidents of 1965.
a. Sri Surendra Ghose, #3 man of the Congress Party upset the audience here when he said he had come to this city particularly to meet the writer.
b. When the top scholars on Asian literature came to an impasse at the meetings at the Sheraton Palace in this city, they accepted the answer of this person as the “solution.”
c. When Princess Poon Diskul came her she upset the proceedings by greeting this person first and pushing the VIPs out of the way.
All this is external and I am going to add one more thing, showing how far from being “experts” on Asia we are:
Dervish Brotherhoods. Like my model, the late Sir Richard Burton, I have been initiated into these orders and like him also made into a spiritual teacher (Murshid) but I have functioned more.
I was in UAR in Agricultural research (Vide Dr. Ayers then at Rome, and Dr. Mehren, Department of Agriculture). One day a group of scientists from El-Shams University came to my room and told me who they were and why they had come. They regard us as 50% materialist, 50% dialectician and they consider themselves real anti-communists.
Among other things they told me their plans to split Russia and China, giving details. Within a few months a Chinese communist delegation came to Cairo. They stopped at one of the large hotels and never went near the Russian Embassy. It was obvious something was afoot and everything turned out exactly as they said.
That is why one had to correct Prof. Wilbur in some of his published remarks about the Dervishes and thank God he accepted these corrections.
The writer has given his life to the study of Asiatica, mostly religion, history and art. He has travelled far and wide physically, intellectually and spiritually. But he has changed in character and outlook so that he cannot psychologize like the “Philistines” of the day.
Mr. Vice-President, one also represents a number of Asian universities which from our analytical point of view means “conflict of interests.” One is now planning a “Dance of Universal Peace” to be performed at Fatehpur-Sikri in India where the great Emperor Akbar made an abortive attempt to bring all peoples of the Empire together and showed respect to everybody.
It is so easy to discuss almost anything with Asians, on their own levels and from their own viewpoints. We have forgotten our Transcendentalists, we have forgotten our Pragmatists, we are fishing in the murky waters of Dialectics, accepting the premises but from the opposite pole.
At every point we are alike ignoring, even desecrating every principle of every religion, and we do not know it. I am for the “Doves” in so far as they follow the two Adams, Jefferson, Monroe, Lincoln, Senator Hoar and more recent leader. But I am opposed to the “Doves” insofar as they give no consideration whatsoever to the suffering of the peasant masses of Vietnam or any other part of Asia, or the world.
Communists did start this series of complications—I had this from eye witnesses for a long long time. My views have been expressed to her Serene Highness Princess Poon Diskul, and to His Excellency, Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan. One can sit with them in discussions, one can meditate with them, one can commune with them. From one end of Asia to the other I have had an experience similar to.
Meeting the spiritual leader of the Vietnamese Buddhists. He was healing people in a manner similar to Jesus Christ (details in my memories.) Wen he saw the writer; he dropped over thing and without even cleaning his oily hands, embraced him in his cloak and hold him to his heart. We could not speak the same tongue, but in our hearts we were one. This from one end of Asia to the other with all classes from outcasts to some of the VIPs mentioned. Nor do I stand alone—we “Ugly Americans” have not yet been considered; there are many of us, one meets them all the time, but the press? The State Department? The channels of communication?
Where is God? What is humanity? Our American systems of justice and the use of eye-witnesses stops at the twelve-mile limit.
Faithfully,
Samuel L. Lewis
United States Senate
April 27, 1966
Mr. Samuel Lewis
772 Clementina Street
San Francisco 3, California
Dear Mr. Lewis :
Thank you for your thoughtful message regarding recent developments in Southeast Asia. I strongly believe that American troops must not remain in South Vietnam if it is clearly demonstrated that the people of that country oppose our continued presence there. Leaders of the Administration have stated repeatedly that the U.S. would not continue military action if a legitimate government asked us to cease our efforts. I think we must hold the Administration to this pledge.
I believe there is no alternative but to work for the people of Vietnam through their government. If a government which has substantial popular support proves hostile, there is no option left open for us. It is not in the tradition of our democracy to take over and dominate a people against their will.
The people of South Vietnam have fought valiantly against the terror tactics of the Viet Cong. They have shown that they do not wish to be dominated by any foreign element, particularly not by the Communists. I have supported U.S. action to defend them against such domination.
We must keep faith with the American tradition of human liberty and brotherhood. We also have a duty to defend allies who ask our help to resist oppression. The government and the people of Vietnam may well choose to continue to cooperate with the government of the United States. Indeed, I hope they do so and that Vietnam may one day be freed of the agony of war.
Please be assured that I am giving this problem, close attention. With kindest regards,
Sincerely yours,
Thomas H. Kuchel
United States Senator
772 Clementina St.
San Francisco 3, Calif.
August 5, 1966
Hon. Thomas H. Kuchel
Senate Office Building
Washington, DC
In re: Ending the war in Vietnam: reality versus “Realism”
Dear Senator Kuchel,
This is written in the spirit of the poet Francois Villon who challenged the king of France to end the war against the Burgundians. And it is a continuation of “Reality” versus “Realism” which was published by the World Federalists. For we are fighting a quasi-war in which everything is welcome but the facts.
I think I sent to your office copy of a letter in which I expressed to my Congressman (Philip Burton) a willingness to sign a deposition as to what started the war. While I have memory (my library was burned in 1950), some documents and at least two corresponding witnesses right here in San Francisco, they are real characters out of a real “Sarkhan” and, of course, ignored just as the rest of us are. Why I don’t know.
Every day we are making fools out of ourselves, the latest being the protest against the “Beatles” which confirms the charge of our being super-hypocrites which will be substantiated below.
I am sending a copy of this to former Mayor George Christopher. I have never met Mr. Christopher but we have two things in common:
a. We have been at various times in the good graces of Mrs. Grady who stands almost #1 among real Asians as a friendly American.
b. We were both associated with “The Friends of the World,” a Japanese organization. This group had something to do with tree-planting at the Arboretum and establishing the sister-city movement, with special emphasis on the Osaka-San Francisco movement.
Here I have documents which also belong to Reality and not yet to “Realism.”
The president and founder of this group, the late Baron Nakashima, sent me on an anti-communist Buddhist mission. This mission was entirely successful and was equally ignored by our Foreign service and no nonsense about it. I not only can give full details, my diaries, now in the hands of a friend, can substantiate every point. This mission was entirely successful and when my diaries are published—whether in my lifetime or later they will substantiate to the limit of the remarks of Hon. G. Malalasekera of Ceylon “Who can trust a Nation which will not entrust its own citizens?”
For the chief source of information from Vietnam came from my friend, the late Robert Clifton (Phra Sumangalo) who lived among these people, had all the accoutrements of the “Ugly American” and “Sarkhan” and got it and the tragedy is that unless there is a radical change in the policies of the State Department we are going to see more and more of this.
Two weeks after writing Congressman Burton of my willingness to sign a word deposition about the history behind the history in Vietnam and the refusal to accept the reports of my late friend, this was mentioned to a retired civil merchant right here in San Francisco. I said, “It all comes because of “Mr. Untouchable.” “Yes, I know. I was his appointment secretary and I know he positively refused to meet Rev. Robert Clifton or to accept any report from him.”
If we continue on our way, “Reality vs. “Realism,” it puts the lie on our highest officials and supports Dr. Malalasekera. What is worse this the only country in the world that has professional “experts.” The same men go to Washington—and are accepted—to testify as “experts” on Vietnam, space travel, budget balancing, what to do about Russia and South America and everything else.
I do not wish to write any “J’accuse!” But among other things, I have the picture of my one war hero, now General Edward Lansdale and when I wrote to him the letter was returned untouched! This is the way the United States operates, that we are sitting trying to find some solution for Vietnam! Nonsense! As I have written before, my host(ess) in Thailand was her Serene Highness, Princess Poon Diskul.
Now on this coming Thursday, August 11, I am speaking on Vietnamese Buddhism at 1005 Market St., this city. It is on Vietnamese Buddhism and does not resemble in any respect what is called “Buddhism” and “Zen” in the “New Yorker,” “NY Times,” and most of the respectable and not so respectable press of this country. The marvelous work of the B’Nai Brith as to the anti-defamation stops right there. This whole country, outside some leading universities, has no more idea of real Buddhisms than I have of the languages spoken by peoples in the disputed areas.
I shall only say here that my first teacher in real Buddhism lived here in san Francisco once and he was an Englishmen, an Englishman ignored by our four English “experts” on Buddhism (Watts, Huxley, Heard and Humphreys) and this is mentioned because “Only in America” and especially in California we turned to Englishmen and some Europeans as “experts” on the Orient.
In India I was very popular for saying: “The “experts” on Asia are European Professors and American newsmen and never, never may they be American Professors and European newsmen.” This was risible because it leaves the Orientals out of it. It is ridiculous because we have some of the finest scholars on Asiatica in this country. (I am sure some of them have been sent for from time to time but the public and press do not know it. To them these “Englishmen” are the experts.
As I have constantly written, “This world cannot be half free, half dialectic. I shall stand by “To make a friend, be a friend” (Emerson.) I shall begin with Shylock’s speech and apply it to the Vietnamese, and others.
When the Doves asked my position I asked them; “Do you know whether the Vietnamese peasants wish us to withdraw? Where is your evidence? Once I went to a Dove meeting and they asked for funds. I said: “I belong to a Vietnamese Buddhist temple.” They stayed clear from me. Why?
Therefore my talk will be non-political. There is no advantage of supporting one or another power blocs who are not in the least interested in the humanity of S.E. Asia.
I shall not repeat allusions to the session with Prof. Orr at UCLA. This also belongs to “Reality vs. “Realism.”
Now, Senator, we are fighting two complete wars in Vietnam, and they are (uselessly) complicated.
a. To prevent the ceaseless communist infiltration of other lands.
b. To impose our “ways of life” upon exotics.
On account of the first I cannot see eye-to-eye with the Doves, excepting our endorsement years ago of the “Kellogg-Briand” pact. The late Senator Hiram Johnson, was, if anything, an anti-hypocrite and in many ways a hero to a morality which we have to preach and equally must not practice. And there we stand before the world.
I was living in North Bombay during the Krishna Menon election (and therefore my reports unanimously rejected by the press!). He held up a picture of a prominent movie actress: “Do we want this in India?” That elected him and will continue to elect anti-American candidates in Asia.
So we stand as super-hypocrites, protesting against the Beatles and permitting in Hollywood and on Montgomery St., San Francisco everything that Jesus Christ stood against.
The Asia masses know us from our movie pictures and our movie magazines, “True Filth” and semi-pornographic publications. These were spread, are being spread, by the communists who are supported at every turn by those who dare not “clear the inside of the cup.”
It never seems to occur to the Foreign Office that anybody who follows in the pathways of Sir Richard Burton (the great translator) might win the heart of the exotics. “The Ugly American” was praised—but not, of course, practices. “Sarkhan” has all but been censored out of existence.
Now the Thai government has called for a Peace Conference. If these sensitivity people are against communism, they are also against Christianity, they are against (most bitterly) the “Only in America” British-expert Buddhism, and they have their own morals which may be quite different from our own.
I do not think I have met ten anti-capitalistic Asians excepting for real professional communists (who do not act like Hearst & Co. say). They want our social order and our political order to some extent but they cannot stand our double-standard “moral” behavior. They do not like mottoes, shibboleths, slogans, etc.
If there is any favorable public reaction to my speech I shall, for the first time, get in touch with representatives of foreign lands. It is silly to deny my knowing them. Then Dr. Chandrasekhar, the famous demographer was here last year, he openly asked for collaboration.
It is not a question of ego, it is question of success. I am also sending copy of this to Wisconsin University. It is time to use the talents of our American savants. Real knowledge is power.
Faithfully,
Samuel L. Lewis
772 Clementina St.,
San Francisco 3, Calif.
August 15, 1966
Hon. Thomas H. Kuchel,
Senator Office Building
Washington, D.C.
Dear Senator Kuchel:
Reality versus “Realism” in S.E. Asia
This letters is written in utter pessimism with doubt as to the success of our efforts in Vietnam. From the military standpoint alone once a man is a general he is a general. We would remove no Burnsides, no McClellans, nor Hookers today; we would give no opportunities for a Grant or Sherman sad we not only have adhered to Braddock’s methods and not Washington but we grant any moneys asked for. There is no removing a losing pitcher.
The other night I spoke on “Vietnamese Buddhism.” The collection was taken for a fellow-Sarkhanian, as I call them, one of those Americans who has lived In S.E. Asia because of his being a Buddhist. The collection was for the Buddhist war orphans. In the midst of the war—this so-called land of tolerance and religious liberty—lauds collections of moneys for Christian orphans and does nothing for Buddhist orphans and this we call “winning the hearts of Asians.”
I should not say for one moment that Vietnamese Buddhism is better than Vietnamese Christian but we have given those Buddhists little more consideration than the Nazis gave the Jews.
However “we” does not include President Johnson who has managed, with some skillfulness, to have representatives in all camps and I mean just that and I am not talking from deductions of ivory-tower editorials which sometimes influence foreign policy.
The immediate aftermath of talking on “Vietnamese Buddhism” was to be invited to speak on it again in Santa Barbara and I may get other invitations.
The follow-”Sarkhanian” to whom I turned over the collection was selected by her Serene Highness, Princess Poon Diskul Rinzai as her personal representative here. Not that it means anything to us.
Much of my talk on “Vietnamese Buddhism” was an exposure of “only in American-Buddhism,” a mixture of speculations, delightful essays and even filth which passes for “Zen” and “Buddhism” but “only in America.”
I am writing this because the next day after the lecture a lot of material come from Thailand, from the office of Her Serene Highness, with threats and warnings against this country.
New despite the press, CIA, State Department et al:
1. Originally I was invited to Thailand by her Serene Highness.
2. I became immediately after entering Japan the guest of the chief lay Zen Buddhist of that land, the late Baron Nakashima.
3. Baron Nakashima envisions an anti-communist entente among the Buddhists and sent me as his representative. The one American that became privy to it was William Eihlers of Asia Foundation, the Foreign Office shunned this person and the mission.
4. The mission itself was entirely successful.
Now the real Buddhists are protesting in no uncertain terms. Not only have we scorned the presentation of “Vietnamese Buddhism” but the press and radio have advertised and accepted in every direction what I call “The Four Englishmen-Buddhism” which has only very vague connections with the Dharma of Asia.
And it is also true that in all our conferences on Asia Chinese are exclude, no matter what view, and I am not going over that again.
Actually the State Department knows better, and the universities know better and their Buddhism is headed by Dr. Richard Robinson of Wisconsin U. who knows, perhaps, more about real Asian religions than anybody else is the country, including a whole stack of “experts” educated in Europe and a lot of self-devised “experts” as Northrup of Yale.
So we “win the hearts of Asians” by deriding what is closest to them and now it has come out in no ascertain terms.
The exposure of the nonsense about Cambodia is only one of a whole stream of “reality vs. realism.” Instead of delivering the peasants of Asia from communism we are making ourselves fools before the world. We muffed the chance to bring India and Pakistan together, leaving that to the Russians (not even the UN). Is this our foreign policy?
Faithfully,
Samuel L. Lewis
772 Clementina St.
San Francisco 3, Calif.
September 3, 1966
Hon. Thomas H. Kuchel
Senate Office Building
Washington, DC
How California Can Help Asia: Orations or Actions?
Dear Senator Kuchel:
Water. The President’s pronouncements today show the possibilities of making real friends in real places and during the years one has written in particular to your Mr. Hass on this and related subjects.
While I have been particularly interested in the efforts of the University of California (all campuses) and the USDA Station at Riverside, there is now also being perfected methods of recovering industrial wastes.
The idea (or ideal) that this State might become a model for foreign Nations to emulate still stands and an awakened interest in what is being accomplished on the “Six Campuses” could save money, time and effort. It is most unfortunate that world coverage has been given to the activities of a few students and professors, notably at Berkeley, to obscure the great accomplishments and researches on the campuses, by research teams and by graduates abroad.
One shall only mention in passing the Salt Water Conversion efforts at Berkeley and Richmond; the sewage and other recoveries at UCLA and the Dry Lands Research Station at Riverside. But individually and collectively UC men have covered so much of the critical surface of the earth, about which we know no little. Only if there are any more conferences by any department from Washington it should lead to come action.
I myself laid out a water program which even the Saudian Arabians amazed me by saying they would recognize Israel if we promote the undertaking. Then some private powerful interests compelled an unknown person like myself to desist.
Real foreign cultural exchange has been instituted by the University of California, Santa Barbara and Los Angeles campuses. For the first time there seems to be a real human, personal effort to exchange students, teachers and cultures in an ideal way. It is no longer necessary to promote ideas; it is necessary to have some forms of publications informing the public as to realities. UCLA is now giving India what India has been crying for years, but we always know better??
Asia Foundation. I have an impending appointment with this admirable organization to inform them on matters just come to hand and related subjects.
False cultural exchange and U Thant. The resignation of Hon. U Thant follows the course of moral law. The poor peasants of S.E. Asia have no course but to watch and see whether they and their children are crushed by the communists or by us.
As written before, Her Serene Highness, Princess Poon Diskul, perhaps our best friend on the whole continent of Asia, has proclaimed vociferously against “Feringhi Oriental Philosophy” found only in America; displacing the historical Buddha and the moral codes of a great religion and even having fun out of it (e.g. Sausalito). We do not, and at the moment dare not (?) act toward the defamation of Asian religions like we do concerning the prevailing faiths of this country.
The moves by the University of California are going to make it possible for a few people to learn about the real faiths of real Asia. True, some of our Universities in the Midwest (Wisconsin, Illinois and Michigan, etc.) do this for their students but their efforts do not reach the press and general public. The attack on us by the retiring Ambassador from Pakistan followed by the withdrawal of the wonderful Secretary-General from Burma should make us consider the possibilities of Shylock’s speech being applied to all peoples.
Food problems are closely connected with Water problems. I have an open date on the Berkeley campus to follow up their splendid integration program of the different departments of Agriculture. But on my recent trip I found as above, the disjunctive efforts in Desert Research, and the slowness in getting some accomplishments to Washington despite the presence of the Assistant Secretary of Agriculture (Prof. G. Mehren).
The intercampus UC conference on “Food Problems” a few years back ended in a plethora of oratory, mostly by famous persons, and not a single active project.
Ecology. I think you understand this subject. Your stand on the Colorado River and on the Redwood complex shows the dangers of interfering with the “order of Nature.” One is not concerned with particulars but the need of adopting programs which can become world-wide.
After a conference at Berkeley I shall again visit the various campuses, if necessary, working for a continuation of intercampus relations, not only for the sake of this grand institution but to help the country, and the world.
Faithfully,
Samuel L. Lewis
772 Clementina St
San Francisco 3, Calif.
October 8, 1966
Hon. Thomas H. Kuchel
Senate Office Building
Washington, DC
Dear Senator Kuchel;
There is a headline in the paper today, “Kuchel Plan for Vietnam ‘Insulation’” and I should appreciate copies thereof if they have not already been sent.
This country, the world cannot remain half free, half dialectic and one thing is certain, very certain, hat our foreign policy seems to be based entirely in fighting communism with dialectical weapons and ignoring basic facts in order to do so.
This complex arose over the infiltration of Buddhist monasteries by communists. My best friend, the late Phra Sumangalo was caught in it, his reports rejected and he died of a broken heart. Quite independent of that I was selected by the late Baron Nakashima of Japan to carry an anti-communist petition from one land to another which finally came into the hands of my good friend, Dr. S. Radhakrishnan, then Vice-President, now President of India. And all the refusals of the State Department, press, and commentators is not going to change that; and the history of the conflict as written for the new Encyclopedia of Buddhism contains a lot of objective facts which all our censorship is not going to eliminate from the history of the world.
It is notable that Dr. Radhakrishnan, immediately after receiving the petition brought him, went to Japan and was very well received, and while he may not have committed himself, he did then and since ally himself with my very good friend, Princess Poon Diskul Pismai who took over the world Buddhist Federation to stop the communist infiltration which is more than all our editors, State Department et all have ever done.
We are now petitioning to see that Hon. U Thant, who certainly does not belong to the prevailing religions of this land, remains at the helm of the U.N. Now I worked with the late Dr. Henry Atkinson for almost thirty years on the subject, “World Peace Through Religion” and have seen the operations of many faiths which we adamantly refuse to examine excepting in rare instances (e.g. University of Wisconsin), and consequently we have substituted dialectical warfare for winning the hearts of real people.
I shall continue to repeat that during the War we had a GII policy accepting valid Buddhism as the “faith of half Japan”—to use the words of a born American, Lafcadio Hearn, whom we seem to have forgotten. And when the surrender took place, General McArthur pursued this path and policy and won the good-will of millions of flesh-and-blood human beings (not editorial comments) by his respect for some valid forms of Buddhism, i.e. practiced by human beings, not lectured on by ci-devant Englishmen (whom the LSD movement have seized to prove? certain points).
There is nothing to stop us now from doing the same thing and pursuing a pro-American successful policy which worked instead of the constant appeals to everybody else but the people directly involved in Vietnam. President Johnson is now going abroad to meet Englishmen, Australians, Koreans (especially Christian ones), and ignoring the actual Asians whose lives are at stake.
There is a new regime on the Berkeley campus and it is noteworthy that my diaries were a priori rejected there under Strong & Co., and by change of personnel the same diaries will be welcome at UC, Santa Barbara. This is doubly welcome because the University of California on the Santa Barbara and Los Angeles campuses has now provided real cultural exchange with real Asians, something of which we ought to be very, very proud. And I am hoping between and among them to place before them the basic fact that the majority of people of Vietnam are Buddhists, Buddhists and Buddhists—but still Buddhists and all we have to do is to resume the same policy we did during the war. And incidentally General Lansdale was involved at least indirectly, then occupying the next office in the same building where GII was then housed.
But opposed to the war as I am there can be no more contact with “Doves,” a generic term used by all kinds of people for all kinds of purposes. Twice I attended “Dove” meetings and when they passed the plate around and I said “I belong to the Vietnamese Buddhists,” they ran away; and at a recent meeting I was snubbed along with there who defended the U.N. or made any sort of positive proposals.
We are now building The Temple of Understanding at or near Washington in which the local Buddhist Bishop (Hanayama) is playing a decided role. But nobody has ever consulted him about Buddhism.
I am expected to visit the Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions soon, delayed by mutual agreement on account of Bishop Pike’s “heresy” complex. One hopes that there may be a platform in this country where ear- and eye-witnesses who are not communists may be permitted to present their experiences—experiences, not ideas.
It is notable that under Chancellor Strong nearly all Asians were denied the platform, or even the floor while first British and then American communists were given all the time they wanted.
The latest news comes from a very valid source showing a growing fear of America which not only uses force but does not recognize the religions of Asians. And I have just received a letter from His Excellency, President Radhakrishnan in full approval of seeking a highway for peace based on objectivity, this being a fairly good understanding of the real religions of the real Asians.
Faithfully,
Samuel L. Lewis
United States Senate
Nov. 4, 1966
Mr. Samuel L. Lewis
772 Clementina Street
San Francisco 3
Dear Mr. Lewis:
Thank you for sending me your thoughts on the conflict in Vietnam. Like you, I am greatly concerned over the toll which this conflict has exacted on the people of Asia, and on the people of America as well. In discussion of this subject, I have advocated an approach to settlement through honorable negotiations, possibly through a conference as some have proposed for Geneva. I have also stated categorically that the United States should withdraw its forces if the people of South Vietnam make it clear that our presence is no longer desired.
The events of the last few months, however, have made it clear the only terms left open for negotiation by the Communist regime of North Vietnam would amount to a total abandonment of our effort in that area. It is also apparent that despite internal disturbances, as agitation against the Ky regime, the bulk of the people in South Vietnam do not favor the program of the National Liberation Front and, indeed, do not wish the Americans to withdraw. Under these circumstances it is important that the North Vietnamese understand that their aggression on South Vietnam will be brought to an end by military force so long as meaningful negotiations are not possible. Recent events have shown no acceptable alternative to continuing our military effort. This fact by no means should distract the United States from a determined effort to encourage the growth of governmental institutions in South Vietnam that would give the people an opportunity to determine how they shall be ruled.
I am glad to know your views.
With kindest regards,
Thomas H. Kuchel
United States Senator
United States Department Of Agriculture
Agricultural Research Service
Washington, D.C. 20250
Office of Administrator
Nov. 4, 1966
Mr. Samuel L. Lewis
772 Clementina Street
San Francisco, California 94103
Dear Mr. Lewis:
Dr. Mehren has asked me to respond to your letter of October 28 concerning leaf protein for food. Leaf proteins as vegetables are a source of food protein around the world. There has been a great deal of technological study in the attempt to develop a protein concentrate from leaves which has satisfactory flavor and color. Although there have been various claims of successful products, I am not aware of any that have produced a food of satisfactory quality for humans. The extensive experiments of Pirie at Rothamstead and in various field locations have not resulted in products of satisfactory digestibility, color, or taste.
The primary emphasis which AID and the Department of Agriculture are putting on food products for the world is placed on oil seeds, legumes, and cereals. All of these are traditional foods, well-liked if people can get enough of them.
I am enclosing a reprint of a recent publication which gives an excellent summary of the overall situation. I hope this information will be useful to you.
Sam R. Hoover
Acting Deputy Administrator
Enclosure
United States Senate
January 9, 1967
Mr. Samuel L. Lewis
772 Clementina Street
San Francisco, California
Dear Mr. Lewis:
Thank you very much for your thoughtful correspondence on the Middle East. I have for some time been concerned about mounting problems in that area, and I was therefore especially interested in making a personal trip.
My travels in the Middle East gave me a chance to talk with a great many people, from heads of state, to students, to labor leaders, and many others. As a result of my trip, I did form some judgments concerning some of the problems in the area and possible solutions.
I recently had a chance to go into these views at length in a talk in Boston and I am enclosing a copy of the full text for your use.
I appreciate and share your interest in the Middle East and you can be certain that I will bear your views in mind in my future actions and statements.
Sincerely,
Edward M. Kennedy
772 Clementina St.,
San Francisco 3. Calif.
May 20, 1967
Hon. Thomas H. Kuchel,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
Dear Senator Kuchel:
How California Can Help Asia.
This may be a long, and I hope it is an important letter. “How California Can Help Asia” is by example and we have now taken the first step with the Salt Conversion Plant. I would appreciate any material you can send me. We do not realize (although I think personally you do) the importance of this undertaking. It is incidentally and coincidentally the first big step needed for a real peace program in the real Near East dealing with real people in a real world, as far from the “realism” of the day. It is a real step into what I have been crying about, “Pragmatism versus dialectics.” It will be an example for others to follow.
1. So long as Israelis are more real than Arabs we can never use any good-will. But both die of thirst in the same manner and both will die of thirst in the same manner and we need some Jewish Otellos and Islamic Shylocks to promote understanding.
2. I am enclosing copy of letter to Senator Cooper who is one of the few members of Congress and Senate who knows about real Asians. From a factual point of view it is very hard to differ. Wayne Morse is a wonderful man but the fact is that the communists infiltrated and will continue to infiltrate, they are pledge to the real religions and real superstitions of real people in a real world and we are not; indeed we do not care.
The doors are open to help my real Vietnamese friends get some kind of audience in this country. With our masses of “experts” and contradictory reports on every subject under the sun, you would think occasionally somebody would be interested in realities. This is true occasionally on campuses.
3. I am about ready to write to the new President of India on a basis which would lead to better understanding. I am enclosing copy of letter written to our Vice- President some time ago. Of course there was no response. We don’t work that way. I might get a dozen letters from a dozen Presidents or Prime Ministers, but do you think the President, the Vice-President or State Department cares? This is the tragedy of the time. As Dr. Malalasekera said, “How can you trust a Nation that does not trust its own citizens?” We prefer war and we prefer misunderstandings to war.
Arnold Toynbee is in these parts and I have written asking for an interview. He had just preceded me in a visit to the Sugar Plantation of Khan Brothers at Mardan in Northwest Pakistan.
Jamshyd Khan, one of the co-owning brothers had visited California, learned California methods including the adaptation of mechanization and they had the most successful plantation in all Pakistan. The methods were not copied by others, the methods were not acceptable and any success on this basis—successful adaptation of methods used in this State are the worst possible obstacles to the highly dialectical, subjective methods of AID, Peace Corps or internal policies of “Islamic Pakistan.” Success is not to be copied, not to be emulated and must never interfere with governmental agencies—any government.
It is only recently that the same method was being introduced into a totally different part of Pakistan, the Sind, and the innovators knew nothing about the Khans nor their successful adaptation of California methods. This is the last thing either our State Department or Agricultural Department wants to hear. And this is the tragedy of the day.
The sector between Mardan and Peshawar is known as “Little California.” It produces many of the same crops, but if there are new methods there is little result. You would think that if there is to be a “Peace Corps” in “Little California” some Californians might be sent there—but this is not the way to do things. Better failure than to accept suggestions from an outsider, so failures are what we have and will continue to have in the midst of a world filled with successful achievements.
My recovery will enable me to visit the University of California at Berkeley and the USDA in Berkeley and I think these people are interested in realities and there will continue to be full cooperation. There are no problems, senator, but solutions haven’t come from the right people just as peace plans must come from the right people and I don’t know who the right people are.
Faithfully,
Samuel L. Lewis
410 Precita
October 11, 1967
Hon. Thomas H. Kuchel,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
In re: How California Can Help Asia (cont.)
Dear Senator Kuchel:
There has been nothing but success and satisfaction in the last few days. One has not retreated one inch on “The world cannot remain half free and half dialectic.” Sooner or later the truth-of-facts will overcome the subjective pseudo-truth of opinion.
Sunday night I expressed myself for the first time on Vietnam: “There is nothing but the choice of becoming a first-class corpse or a second-class human being. No other choice is permitted.” The emotional oratory of the Vice-President has nothing to do with the facts of life or the people who live in the world. But contrariwise no other emotionalism and oratory either is going to benefit humanity.
The representatives of the San Francisco School Board have not only accepted my reports but is giving full encouragement to go ahead. The State Department, the press and the CIA may continue to turn down anything from those of us who have lived in Asia and mingled with Asians (vide the late Prof. Burdick) but I was able to discuss the real facts of real Asia more in a short time with professors of the University of California at Davis than with years of efforts in groups verbally dedicated to discussions on world affairs, etc., etc.
Tonight I start lectures on living religions. This will be given under Christian auspices and at first will go slow, but there I shall be given the opportunity at least to present Vietnamese Buddhism. And I understand another group is sending for me in November and there I hope to make arrangements for my Vietnamese colleague to come and speak.
After my next visit to Davis I hope to send Mr. Hass a full objective report. I used the knowledge there on the campus to discuss the plan to bring peace in the Near East. It was as easy there as it is almost impossible elsewhere. “It is not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country !!! ?????????????????????????”
Faithfully,
Samuel L. Lewis
410 Precita Avenue
San Francisco, California
April 8, 1968
To the Hon. George Murphy
To the Hon. Thomas H. Kuchel
Dear Senators
This letter is being written to you both jointly and copies of it will go to the two representatives from this area, Hon. Phillip Burton and Hon. Wm. Maillard.
The original suggestion came from Senator Percy of Illinois whose program toward peace in Asia is one which I believe is pragmatic rather than “realistic,” that is, it is based on humanity rather than on thoughts which emanate from certain interests.
Almost, immediately after hearing from Senator Percy I was summoned by a friend in Seattle, Wash. He is on excellent terms with one of President Johnson’s closest advisors and the adviser has consulted my friend about sending Americans to Asia who will be able to cement better relations because of their empathy and knowledge of Asian cultures. This is not part of our program and a number of letters on this subject, written to former Ambassador, now Senator Cooper of Kentucky, have been received cordially by him.
Senator Percy has brought up a point, and it is a very moot point, about the meaning of the whole system of representational democracy, when citizens cannot reach the officials of his governments with reports (very important) or suggestions (not nearly so important). But the present policy seems to be that suggestions from the “right people” are important and reports from “insignificant people” are not important at all.
The Administration claims to be fighting a war so that certain Asian peoples among whom voting is not a custom, decide, indeed must decide their future at the ballot box. At the same time the elected and even more the appointed officials do not have to pay attention to their electors even when the greatest welfare of this land is concerned.
I am not going into the past history. Believing—one of the most useless of beliefs—that we could stop communism by establishing friendships with noncommunist peoples, especially in my case, those of Asia, I have been welcomed in circles where not even our Vice-Presidents have been invited. But direct reports of a citizen who has succeeded where newspaper man, diplomats and curriers have failed, are not wanted. And though we may repeat the words of the late President Kennedy, “It is not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country,” this remains a dead aphorism. Worse, it remains as a symbol of hypocrisy and cause of fear to multitudes of Asians who see that our words have no relations to our actions.
I am not going into past history. I think it is a shame that there is no Arab Secretariat and that we have no real cultural relations with the vast Arabic world, vast in time as well as in space. Yet we welcome cultural exchanges with those very communists against which we propagandize. Even worse, in the East-West conferences held in this vicinity, there have been no Buddhist nor Islamic speakers but communists have spoken from the podium.
I do not know whether we have changed this policy. I have been personally excluded from these conferences at least three times and the question has arisen whether I may attend the East-West Conference to be held in Hawaii in 1969. Meanwhile I am cooperating with a real East-West Conference to be held in Darjeeling, India this year, to which no communists have been invited. This is a meeting of the real religions of the real world, and it happens to be arranged by Americans (thank God), by which I mean The Temple of Understanding under construction near Washington. It is a wonderful thing that Americans can take the lead in fomenting friendships with Asians without any intervention of bureaucrats, the press or “experts” whose éclat is restricted to this land.
There was a time when I knew most of the representatives from this State and could bring all matters to my former neighbor, the Hon. Norris Poulson. I was no longer in his district when he was Congressman, but all doors were open. Now it is with difficulty that any report can be accepted and the State Department has refused to answer any letters, including my original inquiry about joining the Peace Corps.
We are not going to win the hearts of Asians by excluding their representatives from our conferences and by not having real cultural exchanges. And the situation is not mitigated because we still insist on having communist representatives at assemblages—excepting we did not do this for the Dominican Republic and were successful.
I must now call your attention to “The Triumph” by former Ambassador Galbraith which appears in the current issue of “The Saturday Evening Post.” It is along the same general lines of “The Ugly American” and “Sarkhan” from which we have apparently learned little. Some of the intentions in this work are, most unfortunately true. We are verbalizing democracy but have the most automatic and dictatorial Foreign Office in existence. But this is the first time when an insider has so advised.
It would still be unfortunate if my own memoirs and those of some of my closest friends were published. We are still Americas but have to watch an imperials and often ignorant Foreign Office formulate or adhere to policies which bring no good fruit. We have not won friends among the people. And it is hypocrisy to speak about allies—what suggestion from former Ambassador Romulo, one of the greatest of diplomats, has ever been accepted by us? If so, how can a mere citizen seek for better consideration, even though he has been treated even above our Vice-Presidents, in visiting Asian lands?
Faithfully,
Samuel L. Lewis
772 Clementina St.
San Francisco 3, Calif.
June 27, 1968
Hon. Thomas H. Kuchel
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
Attention Mr. Hass
Dear Senator Kuchel:
Reality Versus “Realism” continued.
Attention is called to two items in today’s “Chronicle.” Either of those if properly followed up might lead to better understanding if not peace in the Near East.
Desalting Progress (page 11). I have written previously on this subject but today have heard nothing either from the Department of Interior or your office. One runs into the constant cry of “cost” but there is now an undercurrent of ill-will that the Federal Government has funds to send rockets or people into space and yet has not fully explored this possibility.
The American people are kept in ignorance of all the possibilities in this field. If we can get water from either the Mediterranean or Red Seas, it will be possible to establish the Palestinian refugees in better places.
Unfortunately under the blind spots of “realism” the emphasis on Palestinian refugees has taken the emphasis off of Jewish refugees from Yemen, Iraq and other lands. It about balances.
Cotton Pest (page 8). Here the press is far behind actualities. I was not in Cairo one week in 1960 before I was informed about this hazard to Agriculture. The UAR government despite our press, TV and even foreign policy has gone along ignoring the large number of graduates of the University of California in this part of the world. I have talked with many of them. The type of aid they wanted was not granted and there are rumors that President Nasser wishes to restrict the importation of protective chemicals.
I have long believed that one way toward understanding is closer continued relations between alumni at home and abroad. On July 12 I am to meet Mr. Erickson of the Alumni Association at Berkeley to discuss this subject. We fail to take into consideration the enormous benefits of American and especially University of California education.
There is more need for some of us to sit down with each other before demanding Arabs and Israelis do that. We do not realize the importance either of Water or Pest Control; they are not always the most “exciting” political issues.
Faithfully,
Samuel L. Lewis
Mr. Samuel L. Lewis
410 Precita Avenue
San Francisco, California
July 3, 1968
Dear Mr. Lewis:
Thank you for your thoughtful and generous comments. In 30 years of public service, I have found many rewards. The greatest of these has been the continued support of loyal friends and constituents from the State of California. Your letter is deeply appreciated and I hope you will continue your active interest in the broad range of public problems of our great Nation.
With kindest regards,
Thomas H. Kuchel
United States Senator
410 Precita Ave.,
San Francisco, Calif. 94110
February 9, 1970
Hon. Paul McClosky Jr.
House Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
Dear Congressman McClosky:
Seeking peace between human beings.
I have been watching your career with more than passing interest, being in the district, just to your north. No doubt there is some romanticism in it for one has been in his life an admirer of both the late Robert Lafollette Sr. and still thinks Theodore Roosevelt was one of the greatest of Presidents and greatest of man believing that a great man has great faults and a small man has small faults and recognizing the many but great faults in that philosopher-scientist-president.
The position of the writer is dramatically droll, having for years worked and worked in vain to find means to bring human beings together with human Beings, and being knocked down everywhere; and now being accepted by the young, almost as a priori accepted, as the elders usually a priori rejected him. Neither of these policies is desirable but one foments the other. I adhere to the principles of honesty, objectivity and impersonality which do not get one far in politics or even in business but so necessary in the scientific community and also with the young of the day.
I am preparing to go to a conference in Geneva, Switzerland, under the auspices of The Temple of Understanding whose headquarters are in Washington. There is one difference between this group and other peace organizations, and that is the element of reverence. The participants must show reverence and consideration one to another. This does not belong to the “peace” programs of dialecticians, the press and the literati. Even the best of programs consider the mass of humanity as a compilation of robots, guinea pigs and peasants to be commanded. The sense of reverence changes all this without any emotional oratory.
I feel that something will be accomplished in Geneva. One has had long and frustrating experiences in the field of peace through religion. I began with the late Dr. Henry Atkinson of the World Church Peace Union in 1928. He asked me to study the lesser known religions. I have. His successors point blank refused all my reports, and so has every so-called “peace” group contacted. Most will not even grant an interview.
I had to resign from one of the most respectable and famous. They asked me to send ten dollars so I could meet the famous people of the world. I wrote: “You are asking a man who has been a guest of honor at the royal palaces of Japan and Thailand and had teas in the presidential mansions of Pakistan and India to send you money.” This group would never permit me on the platform but I broke up a meeting by simply passing around a picture of Her Serene Highness, Princess Poon Diskul of Thailand and His Holiness Pope Paul. This sort of thing is more anathema in the “peace” groups than all the Marxists, minute men, Black Panthers and Birch people. To be able to mingle with humanity at the highest levels and the lowest has been not anathema but verboten. Why?
In the same class of impossibles was my turning a mob of Hindus on communist speakers. If I had been a newsman and been mobbed, that would have been news. If I had been a communist and addressed any such audiences, that would have been news. But to speak to thousands upon thousands of Asians and to be invited where the various Vice-Presidents have not, that must not be news—but not with the young, not with the young.
For instance I am enrolled in a class studying South-east Asia, the S.E. Asia of Rand-McNally not of the press. Most of the enrolled are my fellow “Ugly Americans.” The instructors are “Ugly Americans.” We have lived in one part or another of the lands of the region (my land was Thailand). We are excluded but now we are getting together. And I am expecting to have a meeting here to be addressed by a Vietnamese on Vietnamese Buddhist, a subject so far more verboten than any form of communism.
But the big protect I have in mind will come after the return from the conference of Geneva. It will be to try to find a human and humane formula for Palestine, the Palestine of humanity, not of power structures. We are beginning with Arabs who are either citizens of Israel or not inimical to it. Then we shall add other elements and persons—not the press, not the State Department, but certainly some university representatives. And also this letter is written in the hopes that if you cannot come you do send a representative. After all the Mission District is not too far from San Mateo County.
I am on fairly good terms with my Congressman, Hon. Phillip Burton. The Hon.
Wm.
Mailliard, though on the committee of foreign affairs, has refused to consider
any interview, but he is no worse, than any of the “peace” groups. I did
work out a plan once which the Egyptians, Israelis, Saudians and especially the
UN officials admired, but nothing doing from the State Department or any of the
“big” and some not so “big” peace groups. Was turned down
cold.
But I am no longer concerned. The young are coming here. My “Dances of Universal Peace” are attracting attention and evidently will more—the young and the halls of ivy. That is enough.
Copy of this in being sent to Hon. John Sherman Cooper whom some of us “Ugly Americans” regard as our spokesman in the Senate. This has been especially necessary since the forced retirement of Senator Kuchel of whom also I was a great admirer.
Faithfully,
Samuel L. Lewis
P.S. When I do get to Washington it will also be to call on my old war hero (World War II) and colleague, the retired General Edward Lansdale. He has some ideas about Vietnam. He only lived there.
March 16, 1970
Congressman Paul N. McClosky Jr.
House of Representatives
Washington, D.C.
Dear Congressman McClosky:
I wish to thank you for your letter of March 9. One of the great weaknesses of American foreign policy is the attitude of mistrust held by the State Department towards citizens of this land. The result is that other than newspapermen, practically all reports from all personal, including eye-witnesses, and especially eye-witnesses, are given short shift. This makes communication most difficult and access to the hearts and minds of exotic peoples almost impossible. I am going now to the conference of The Temple of Understanding which will meet shortly I Geneva to discuss world peace through religion. Although very well versed in religions of Asia, for which I can give ample testimony documentary and otherwise, I have been so far barred from nearly all convocations and conventions in this land by so-called “expert authorities” who are neither born in this country nor educated in Asia, nor sat at the foot of Asians. But I must say at this writing the situation has changed considerably for the better, for we are now having Asiatica taught by Asians, and by Americans who have lived and worked on that great continent.
1. I would dismiss all instructors and authorities for AID, the Peace Corps, etc., who are not American born and educated, unless they were at one time citizens of the areas with which we establish relations. By citizen, I mean at least born national, or if not American, we had lived in such lands long enough to have acquired the good will, not merely just the knowledge, of the indigents.
2. I would invite as many Vietnamese to teach and to address American audiences as long as their land is militarily occupied. (I do not wish to imply we have been entirely wrong. Before we began slaughtering members of the Buddhist majority, the Communists themselves were doing this. In fact they started it.)
3. Without challenging our policy toward Israel, or our policies in the Near East, I would open up the doors of our universities to a number of qualified Arabs. And if we felt like intervening in the affairs of Nigeria, etc., also opening the doors of our universities and educational institutions.
(Nearly all of our information, and especially our misinformation, comes through what I call the diabolical God, UP-AP. In scientific and legal matters we demand substantiative and corroborative evidence; at the present time no such thing occurs. This applies especially to Laos. But we have a terrible policy, absolutely anti-democratic, absolutely anti-legalistic of accepting reports unsubstantiated, from channels of communication. Against this monstrous machine the average citizen has no chance, and while I do not agree with our Vice-President, I feel our culture must take into consideration, that right or wrong, he was trying to be objective, and the same is not true of the persons and institutions he has been criticizing.
I blame the State Department, and Foreign Service for the easy matter in which they accept presumable news from these sources, and are not so open to anything that comes from the mass of citizenry. There is a vast difference between accepting ideas from the masses, and accepting valid reports therefrom. The result is a tremendous barrier between ourselves and nationals of other lands who would like to be friendly, but are barred because policies are considered semi-divine, and news reports from other than official groups are entirely disregarded.
In other words, we need some kind of central intelligence agency, which is willing to collect facts and listen to eye-witnesses, especially reports which do not interfere with the foreign policy of the time. This is impossible now; utterly impossible. Indeed, anyone who is successful in establishing friendship with exotic peoples by some method “not in the books” is regarded with suspicion and often with more than suspicion.
We need to study ways of establishing friendships with peoples of other lands, on bases they suggest, and that they are willing to accept. I refer to the great difficulty in getting the foreign office to recognize the existence and success of Townsend Harris in Japan. But even this grudging acceptance of an American Hero in one Asian land has done practically nothing to awaken acceptance of other American heroes in other Asian lands. It is in fact become tiring and thankless even to mention this subject. Americans going abroad, especially those in foreign offices, should know something by those Americans who are admired in the area they are to visit, or where they may be stationed.
In 1960 I attended a Thanksgiving celebration in Lahore, Pakistan. I was the only person present not on a government payroll. I was also the only person present who knew the history of the country for the previous 200 years. this was equivalent to getting a blackball. In fact I addressed over 100,00 nationals in Pakistan, and the only American ever present at those gatherings was a paid school teacher. Yes, there were communists around, and that is another story, and a very black one. God help the American who becomes popular in an Asian country and who is lured by communists therefor.
But now I am going to a peace conference armed not with a dialectical tribe, but with literary quotations from Americans who represent universal outlooks and who are greatly admired by peoples of other lands: Emerson, Whitman, Peirce, the various James, etc., etc. These men are far more popular all over the world than any Russian excepting Tolstoy.
I don’t want to go into this further. My own efforts within the coming month will demonstrate the validity of my position. I am most thankful you are willing to give heed. You will recognize I lost a very good friend in the forced retirement of Sen. Thomas Kuchel.
Faithfully,
Samuel L. Lewis
May 19, 1970
Senator Abraham Ribicoff
Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C.
Dear Senator:
I wish to second all your efforts at the present time, both in behalf of youth, and what I call an honest endeavor to get this country, and perhaps the world, out of “realism” and into reality. Although I am in my seventies, I am becoming a veritable Pied Piper for the young, and not only locally, but in distant places. To me, it is not a question of youth against age or of generation gap, but of reality versus “realism.”
There are now some movements, very quietly of course, to get me to write my autobiography. If I ever do it will make Zola’s J’Accuse amateurish. Yesterday I had an interview with a Rabbi. In general I found Rabbis and their protestant colleagues so induced with the “Judeo-Christian ethic” that they have no time for interviews, excepting of course with respectables. But I have been recently to a conference of the leaders of the real religions, held at Geneva, and among their efforts was one for world peace: clergyman, spiritual leaders and some scientists from all parts of the world getting together without the un-benefit of newsman and diplomats.
The early days of the conference were marked by profound apologies from Rabbis and Protestant clerics, too concerned with the Judeo-Christian ethic to have time for the common man. All this is over. Those Rabbis and Ministers I should count among my best friends.
I am not going to relate here what happened. I have been in touch on and off with the only Senator who has lived in Asia with Asians, Hon. John Sherman Cooper. When I come to Washington I shall be the guest of the family of Sen. Millard Tydings Jr. I do not wish now to upset any proper peace plans, and even less to do anything but cooperate fully with my local Congressman Hon. Phillip Burton.
Before I go on, I wish to say that a benign Providence or God has now made it possible for me to accomplish ends without begging financial support from anybody.
I am writing because of the dire danger of becoming a mob leader of the youth. They are not only coming to me more, but I have to leave shortly to conduct a youth summer camp. Later in the year I shall have to visit the Boston, Cambridge area. And when I tell the young people who turned me down, who turned my friends down, they wildly acclaim. They want to hear that as much as they want to hear facts.
And who were my friends? There was the late Robert Clifton who lived for years in Vietnam, who kept writing letters about it, and thought he could come here to warn and help this country. This was before the late President Kennedy’s “It is not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.” Unfortunately, Rev. Robert Clifton came here before the administration of the late martyred President. The State Department closed doors in his face. The editors refused to interview him. His friend Dr. G. Malalasekera arose in the UN and acclaimed, “How can you trust a nation which does not trust its own citizens?” We saw to it that Dr. Malalasekera was not elected President of the UN. Instead we campaigned to elect a diplomat, representing a country now in alliance with communist China! This is diplomacy.
Dr. Malalasekera was forcefully retired. He has been devoting his efforts to The Encyclopedia of Buddhism. This Encyclopedia is being compiled by devotees of Buddhism and not by carefully selected CIA intellectuals. It will have a good deal to say about Dr. Clifton and the whole Southeast Asian complex from a Buddhist point of view. Excepting in the Washington area, we have not had much Buddhist Buddhism in this land, but it is coming. Reality cannot forever bend before “realism.”
The same pattern is true of Laos and Cambodia. I can relate the persons and the incidents. I personally went through the same thing on a peace feeler mission between India and Pakistan.
The same was even more true for the Near East. I had a program and both Egyptians and Saudi Arabian assented they would accept Israel under the conditions presented. UN officials were enthusiastic.
(Here I might add a trite American saying, “Let’s call the whole thing off.”) Dr. Malalasekera was right. And youth is now revolting against subjective emotionalisms masquerading as facts.
I am hoping to have a meeting between some Israelis, Palestinian Arabs citizens of Israel, Palestinian exiles, and a couple of Christians of different outlooks. Just a get together. this is very contrary to diplomacy no doubt, but the world is tired of inane diplomacy and the bizarre choice of an emotional and uninformed Vice-President and emotional intellectual, but naively uninformed, pseudo-encyclopedists called “commentators” and “experts.”
Youth of the world unite, you have nothing to lose.
Sincerely,
Samuel L. Lewis
December 7, 1970
Senator Charles H. Percy
US Senate
Washington, DC
Dear Senator Percy,
One of the really forgotten men of today, I mean really forgotten ad not symbolically so, was the late President Eisenhower. He gave a great warning speech which has been appropriately forgotten, of dangers to come, calling for sacrifices. I dryly turned to my colleagues and said, “This country is ready for any sacrifice but one: the abolition of Christmas and the restoration of the celebration of the birth of Lord Jesus Christ.” But now there is a new generation, large segments of which believe in Jesus Christ, and others willing to do so. They are mocking and deriding Christmas and we are having a recession simply because we are wedded to “Realism” and avoid reality whenever we can.
I am writing to you at this time because of your remarks on SST. There is so much behind your statements. Of course some people are going to lose. This is all part of “realism.” One may have a long program for peace and employment, the elements of which might be quite unpopular in the older senses but quite popular before the humanity of the day.
For the first time in my life I spoke at the University of California. I had long been barred from that institution and a number of others in this country by that “only in America” institution, the European “expert” on Oriental philosophy. That day is almost over. I was totally successful at a meeting of the representatives of the real religions of the real world, and have equally been successful in visits to Harvard and vicinity and New York. Indeed, the closer we came to the UN, the more beautiful the response.
So I am enclosing herewith a copy of the draft program on which we are working today and quite successfully, praise to God. Unlike the “realists” and the important people and organizations, Dr. Gunnar Jarring gave me hours and likewise his associates and assistants, and they all praised my approach. Now we are doing something about it. Indeed, we are having a grand bazaar in this city of Sausalito, just across Golden gate strait on December 20.
We were given so much encouragement, and especially by former Ambassador Badeau who is now at Columbia University. And we found out, as he obligingly told us, that the place to look for help is among the lesser known Foundations, some of which are actually designed and devoted to peace, and not just avoiding income tax payments.
Last week I spoke at the University of California and included in my address remarks on “Jesus Christ vs. Christianity” and “Mohammed vs. Islam.” The audience was satisfied and I am again to speak tomorrow.
In the meanwhile, I gave established out of my own small income a peace scholarship for the University of California students, and it may be possible that here will be additions to this. It is very certain that the young people who are interested in realities and not in the traditional nonsense word “realism,” are doing everything possible to promote programs of actualities. And with the rise of so many new organizations, disgusted with the empty verbalisms of the past, the responses are becoming more and more beautiful, but more and more against the superficial verbalisms of the past generation. In this we are finding more and more church leaders also, breaking their shackles of pretences which they can do without going contrary to their theological backgrounds.
In the course of endeavors to promote peace and understanding I had to insult a Rabbi in public when he said there were no cases on record of Christians stopping programs. I not only insulted him, I was immediately attacked by all his followers, who fortunately were outnumbered in the lecture hall. Then I told him and them about former Governor-Senator Saltonstall of Massachusetts. I still think it is a shame an disgrace when emotional orators can give the lie to actual American history and to some of the men whom I think we should be proud.
But do not get any idea that this is the usual Jewish response. Without any nonsense I can truly say that some of my best friends are Rabbis. But some are also catholic Priests and Protestant Ministers and Islamic Holy men (not Imams however).
The younger people are turning from Christianity, but not from Christ.
When it comes to impeachments, I do not know or care about Justice Douglas. But I do care about a former president who was a Republican. His famous motto was, “Let us have peace.” I feel sure you are one of those Republicans who sometimes agree with the former late President U.S Grant.
Faithfully,
Samuel L. Lewis