I'm home on annual leave today and catching up on email.  For those who are 
following the NARA declass story, here is something I posted yesterday on 
H-Net's historians' H-Diplo List.  This follows NARA's release of a redacted 
version of its MOU. 

Subject:NARA releases reclassification document [Krusten]
Date:4/11/2006 8:11:07 PM Eastern Standard Time
From:[log in to unmask]

From: Maarja Krusten

For an Associated Press (AP) story about the release by the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA) of a redacted Memorandum of
Understanding on re-review of classified historical records, please see
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-Archive-Secrecy.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

AP notes that "It is in the interest of both(unnamed agency) and
the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) to avoid the
attention and researcher complaints that may arise from removing material 
that has
already been available publicly from the open shelves for extended periods
of time,' the agreement said." AP notes further that "Meredith Fuchs, general
counsel for the National Security Archive, a private governmental research
group in Washington, said it was unusual that archivists would be involved
in hiding valuable history." 

In my numerous postings here and in other forums about my experiences as
a Nixon tapes archivist, I've tried to explain that NARA does not operate in
a mythical fourth branch of government.  And that it has no firewall around
it to protect it from external pressure.  One can expect that NARA's
officials will face pressure; how they react depends on a number of
factors.  

Seymour Hersh has an interesting account of several such
situations in his 1992 New Yorker article ("Nixon's Last Coverup").  For
example, Hersh describes an order that NARA received in the 1980s from the
Department of Justice (DOJ).  The order represented an attempt by DOJ to
strengthen former President Nixon's ability to block release of his White
House records under the Presidential Recordings and Materials Preservation
Act.  The matter was settled (properly in my view) --  at least de jure --
when a judge threw out the DOJ order in Public Citizen v. Burke, 843 F.2d
1473 (D.C. Cir. 1988).  Of course, President George W. Bush later signed
in 2001 an Executive Order which strengthened the ability of former
Presidents and their families to block disclosures by NARA under another
law (the Presidential Records Act). [There is ongoing litigation over the EO.]

As a former insider, I often feel that some stakeholders (especially
historians) do not fully appreciate the difficult environment in which
NARA operates. Since my late sister once worked in NARA's records
declassification division as a senior archivist, I've been following the
reports about the reclassification controversy closely.  (Some of you may 
remember my
colloquies here on H-Diplo in April 2001 with Warren Kimball, Hayden Peake, 
and
Jeffrey Kimball about the State Department Lot files at NARA.  At that
time, my sister still was alive and a NARA employee.)  I await with
interest any response from NARA to the AP piece, as well as any follow up
news stories.

For the press release NARA issued yesterday, see
http://www.archives.gov/press/press-releases/2006/nr06-85.html .  Click
on link to PDF file within the press release to read redacted copy of
the MOU signed in 2002.)

Maarja Krusten
Former NARA Nixon tapes archivist

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance