I have been thinking quite a bit about Richard Cox's charge to the
profession to care about implications of the reclassification program
at NARA. There is, of course, no more articulate analyst than
Richarc of the political importance of archives, and no one who has
done more to bring this issue to the forefront of American archival
thought. I also have long admired Richard's deep commitment to the
maintenance of a strong, vibrant, and independent national archives.
In looking at Richard's recent postings, though, I am not sure I
agree with the practical steps he suggests for carrying this out. We
can quibble over whether the language in the SAA statement could have
been made stronger; I actually think it is actually a pretty good
statement of the archival principles (many of which we have learned
from Richard) that are at issue in the case.
The heart of Richard's call for action seems to be the
following: "My greatest concern is that SAA, while urging NARA to
continue to reform and strengthen its role in such secret Memoranda
of Understanding, does not call for an independent investigatory
group to examine what has occurred." Earlier Richard wrote: "I urge
all archivists to write to the Society of American Archivists to
demand that our professional association create an independent body
to look into what is going on in this case, as well as reconsider how
NARA can be strengthened as an archival agency in this era of growing
government secrecy."
Three observations:
1. The National Coalition for History, on whose governing Board SAA
sits, has called for Congressional oversight hearings on NARA. Such
hearings would certainly be the best way to learn more about, and
testify on behalf, of operations at NARA.
2. According to the National Security Archive, the ISOO audit of the
current reclassification matter will be released on 26 April. Any
community action now would be premature; we should wait and see if
the audit addresses the key issues.
3. Again, according to the NSA, "Mr. Weinstein has asked the
recently constituted Public Interest Declassification Board (PIDB) to
independently assess the reclassification controversy. The PIDB
reportedly will hold open hearings on the reclassification activities
on May 9, 2006."
With these quasi-independent investigations proposed or under way, I
am not sure that there is an effective place for another outside
investigation, such as the SAA might be able to lead. For example,
as Maarja pointed out, we seem to be getting into a "he said - he
said" argument between Michael Kurtz and John Carlin over whether the
latter had seen and approved the CIA memorandum signed off on by the
former. It would seem to me that a group could only learn about the
inner workings of NARA and the motivations for the reclassification
memo, if that group had the blessing of NARA - or had something close
to subpoena power. For the time being, it would seem appropriate to
accept at face value what the NSA has called "Mr. Weinstein's
commitment to resolve one of the most controversial episodes in
NARA's twenty-year history as an independent agency" and await the
results of the internal investigations.
From a historical perspective, I am not aware of any similar
investigation of a national archival agency by an outside body. The
"Joint AHA-OAH Ad Hoc Committee to Investigate the Charges Against
the Franklin D. Roosevelt Library" comes immediately to mind, but my
recollection is that the effort was a mix success. I haven't
followed the Heiner Affair in Australia closely, but again my sense
is that the ASA commented from a distance (much as SAA has done),
rather than conducted an internal investigation on its own. Please
correct me if I am wrong.
Having said all this, I am still concerned about the archival
principles at issue in this controversy. You can't help wonder why
good, decent, well-meaning archivists such as Michael Kurtz found
themselves in a situation where they were signing classified
memoranda of understanding. My guess is that they were doing the
same sort of balancing act that all archivists must do when it comes
to donations. We sometimes accept a donation with an inappropriate
restriction in the deed of gift in the belief that in doing so, we
are ensuring the preservation of a record that might otherwise be
lost - and we can comfort ourselves with the knowledge that
eventually the records will be opened. I suspect that some at NARA
felt that if they were not accommodating towards the CIA and the USAF
in what is after all a Congressionally-mandate re-review process,
those agencies might be less willing to turn over historical records
to NARA. My impression is that similar sentiments drive NARA's
support of classification review by agencies prior to automatic
declassification. Supporting agencies in their desire to keep
material that should remain classified out of the automatic
declassification chain may lead to more agency willingness to turn
over material to NARA - and less lobbying to short-circuit automatic
declassification. In a perfect world, the Archivist would have the
authority to demand that agencies turn over all historical files to
the Archives, but I am not predicting a perfect world any time soon.
So to me, the bottom line is whether we as archivists work with
donors to meet their concerns - and maybe even reclassify some
records that had been mistakenly classified, and maybe even acquiesce
in an outside agency's decision to classify our agreement - if it
gets more records into the archives. Or do we take a more principled
position - and watch records be destroyed in the agency, out of fear
that they won't be properly protected in the Archives?
Peter B. Hirtle
IRIS Technology Strategist and
CUL Intellectual Property Officer
Instruction, Research, and Information Services Division
Cornell University Library
309 Uris Library
Ithaca, NY 14853
[log in to unmask]
607/255-4033 (ph)
607/255-7922 (fax)
A posting from the Archives & Archivists LISTSERV List sponsored by the Society of American Archivists, www.archivists.org.
For the terms of participation, please refer to http://www.archivists.org/listservs/arch_listserv_terms.asp.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, send e-mail to [log in to unmask]
In body of message: SUB ARCHIVES firstname lastname
*or*: UNSUB ARCHIVES
To post a message, send e-mail to [log in to unmask]
Or to do *anything* (and enjoy doing it!), use the web interface at
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/archives.html
Problems? Send e-mail to Robert F Schmidt <[log in to unmask]>