/%!
AIJC History Dr. Raymond F. McLain
Interviewed by Lawrence li. Ilurohy, Tuscaloosa, Alabama,
February 7, 1973. Do notes ware taken at the time, but these were written down Cron memory the next day.
McLain learned about AUC through Mrs. Bumpy Stevenson, who staid the University was looking for a president. The ar- ranmennts v;ere made through Ed. Dirks and later Douglas Horton. McLain at the time was sitting up the National Council of Churches Higher Education Commission.
McLain visited AUC and other Middle Eastern American colleges on a month's visit. It was very apparent that the problems were immense, that the University was largely a high school, and that it had not adjusted itsolf to the new conditions imposed by the revolution. The Board of Trustees realized the need for dramatic changes.
Finances: had still depended on a few people, largely United
Presbyterians from around Pittsburgh, for funds. The budget was very low. Very great increases in support were necessary in order to attract higher quality facility and increase the size of the school. Several people tried to mount fund raising campaigns in the states. They tried to get corporate donations from Arne rican companies with Middle East interests but only Aramco very successful. McClain visited the heads of the ^ oil comnanies comprising Aramco and pushed for funds. They ' emphasized the idea that AUC was good for the Middle East.and therefore in the end for these companies. Corporations and private donors unwilling to provide sufficient funds. As a/
result, the University turned to the US government when finances became available there.
McLain spent a good deal of time going to the United States, especially Hew York, on financial activities. Moved the university offices from Philadelphia to New York to be near foundation offices and large corporations. Philadelphia very inconvenient
The principal function of the New York office was to provide a base opt of which the President could operate. McLain worked out of it often. He went to the US6-3 times a year on various business activities. He hoped to go by sea but never had the opportunity. .
Ford Foundation: worked on a project basis—they decided
what they wanted and then Ms tried to find an institution to do it. They had worked largely through local Egyptian gov emment institutions, not foreign schools. The first grant was to the Social Research Center, not to AUC as a whole. ,
McLain frequently visited Beirut (no Ford office in Cairo) to visit with Ford officials. No one but the President could really represent the univ ersity in siich activities. Slowly got Ford support for sending faculty members abroad to finish Ph.D's, for English language Institute, and for other SRC projects.
United States gov emment. McXILain spent a lot of time learning how the US government operated by working with various officials in AID, State Department, and Congress. The House of Representatives was especially important on PL^t-CO appropriations \nd eventually in getting the investment grant. The HouseAgriculture Committoe xvas especially important. McLain was impressed with the quality of men in government. Even Jacob Javitz during a meeting indicated that he would not oppose ' the proposal. He found very little anti-Arab sentiment; most Congressmen were eager to keep an American activity going in the Middle East. The University had to be flexible in its requests. Jim Darco was helpful both with the national government and with corporations. Board members were sometimes heloful, but more often for back-up work, letter writing, and the like. The University established a small office in Washington, and McLains rented a small apartment there.
Board of Trustees; McLain beli.eved that the Board should appoint a President and make board policy decisions but not mingle in administration, personnel, and budget matters.
He believed in keeping the board fully informed and providing lots of reports for them. Several Board members caused difficulty, er3pecially Bob Andrus. Joe VanVleck not a favorite of McLain. Mrs. Iloyd and Ed. Dirks especially able and effective members. Few gave largesums of money.
Personn el: Many older faculty members unable to adjust to
the n ew posture of the University. McLain tried to find some position which they could fill, but this was not always successful. He expressed great regret at the necessity of removing (.i.e, firing) several of them, especially Howard, Conn, an d Madison. The University began to offer much higher salaries to attract a different kind, of people, usually associabed with or experienced in American academic persuits. Shane, AlanHorton especially notable additions.
Academic modification: McLain was primarily interested i n
improving the academic quality,of the University. He tried to select a few areas in which the University could excell. They were also selected according to need in Egypt and lack of activity or quality by the Egyptian government schools. They consulted with Ministry of Education officials and had Egyptians on tho committees making decisions. Often strong individuals (Dishay) helped determine the direction of approach. Each would go all the way through to the M.A. level, to achieve real competance in the field.
Relations with the US embassy: Any contact had been avoided
before. When McLain first visited Cairo, he found officials there hostile to and even ashamed of the institution. He cultivated personal relations and got increases suppoi’t, especially from Hare, US Ambassador. Allthis helped in Washington. ■
Arabic: McLain never learned any Arabic but did not find it
a hinderance. Everyone he needed to see spoke English and this caused no problem. Speaking English was better than speaking poor Arabic. The Institution could no longer afford the time, espense, and effort of having people learn Arabic before taking over their jobs.
Hassanein Heikel became close personal friends with McLai n.
They visited often, including in each others homes and spoke as friends. When necessary Heikel could become a conduit for messages to Nasser. When there were problems,McLain would call or see Heikel and he often got matters streightened out and even decisions revdrsed. Heikel had a relative at the university whowas i.ore interested in social life and eventually had to be withdrawn before flunking out. Heikel supported the University in doing this and it won the University respect in government circles.
- 5 -
