The International Student

Movement

Philip G. Altbach

Student activism has become a world-wide phenomenon and has

succeeded in disrupting universities, stimulating political crises,
and on several occasions precipitating revolutionary upheavals.
Its international aspect has been stressed by many observers,
and it seems clear that students in Berlin and Paris were stimu-
lated by events in Berkeley, while the University of California
radicals looked to the militant Zengakuren of Japan for some
tactical and ideological guidelines. Ideological currents travel
quickly among students through journals, international meetings,
and informal communications. The headlines which their demon-
strations receive and the attention given to student activism in
the mass media also bring an international consciousness to student
movements in many countries. It is significant that this is mediated
largely through ad hoc and informal means, and not through any
of the international student organizations which exist to co-
ordinate student activities, a fact which indicates the failure of
these organizations. The upsurge of student activism has come
from the frustrations and intellectual ferment of the students
themselves, while the international organizations have been
essentially ’extra-student’ in nature, stimulated and largely sup-
ported by non-student elements, and closely tied’ to the political
and ideological conflicts of the Cold War, issues which the student
movement finds irrelevant.
While the international student organizations have failed to
create a movement, and while their ideological positions have
become meaningless to the mainstream of the student movements
in various countries, they have achieved some success. Their work
can be seen on several levels, for although their efforts to co-
ordinate student activities and to build a movement have clearly
failed, they have been able to provide assistance to student groups
156
and individual students in some parts of the world, mainly in
the developing areas.
Some historical and political background information is neces-
sary for an understanding and evaluation of the international
student movement, and here we shall deal primarily with those
organizations which have been active in international student
politics, and shall not consider in any detail the more important
but much more ephemeral informal contacts between radical
student movements. The international student organizations
have not brought down governments or shaped the ideologies of
generations of students. More often than not they have followed
political trends rather than initiated them; they are creatures of
the Cold War, and have reflected the tensions of the postwar era.
Yet they have provided a meeting place for thousands of student
leaders - some of whom have gone on to become government
ministers, political leaders, or educators. Their publications have
reached hundreds of thousands of students in both advanced and
developing countries, and have given local issues an international
perspective by providing information about similar student
struggles around the world. On at least one occasion, in Calcutta
in 1948, an international student and youth conference marked
a crucial turning point in communist strategy in the developing
areas. This essay cannot provide a definitive evaluation of the
impact - or lack of impact - of the international student move-
ment, but it can focus some needed attention on a hitherto neg-
lected aspect of the student revolt of the twentieth century.
There is no real international student ’movement’. There are
a number of diverse organizations devoted to education and to
the international co-ordination of student activities, none of
which excites much loyalty among its members; most are, in fact,
confederations of national groups rather than membership
organizations. Furthermore, many of the international student
and youth organizations developed not from the needs of their
member groups, but rather because political or religious bodies
such as the Catholic church, the communist movement, or the
Socialist International, felt the need for a student agency to express
their views. The major student federations organized on political
lines - the International Union of Students (IUS) and the Inter-
1 R. T. McVey, The Calcutta Conference and the Southeast Asian Uprisings
(Ithaca, I958), I.

I57
national Student Conference (I S C) - are probably the broadest
and most representative student internationals, and they reflect
the conflicts and problems which have prevented the movement
from becoming an effective force among university students.
They are not the only international student and youth organiza-
tions ; the World Student Christian Federation and Pax Romana
reflect religious concerns in this area, while the International
Union of Socialist Youth, the International Union of Young Chris-
tian Democrats, and groups representing Liberal students are
examples of directly political international student organizations.
There are also federations which serve youth rather than students,
of which the World Federation of Democratic Youth (WFDY),
and the World Assembly of Youth (WAY) are the most important.
The WFDY, with headquarters in Budapest, has a communist
viewpoint, while WAY, with headquarters in Brussels, was or-
ganized to counter WFDY’s influence. The distinction between
youth and student groups is not precise, since many youth organi-
zations have student participation as well.

The historical context of international student politics

Although not many international student groups were formed
before the second world war, the efforts which were made left
an impression, particularly on young intellectuals from developing
countries studying at the time in Europe. Students from Indonesia
who were studying in Europe developed a sense of nationalism
and of the need for social change at home partly through their
contacts with radical European students at international gather-
ings. These early student organizations laid the groundwork for
the more substantial efforts which were to be made after the war.
European student unions were interested in co-ordinating their
activities on such matters as student travel facilities, intellectual
co-operation, and other non-political issues.
The roots of the international student movement extend back
to the early years of this century and in some instances even
earlier. The World Student Christian Federation (WSCF) and
the international YMCA organization had their origins in the
mid-nineteenth century. The WSCF journal, Student World,
which began publication in 1908, featured articles on students
and student groups and was perhaps the first journal to give
coverage to university affairs in Asia, Africa, and Latin America.
I58
Christian student movements held international conferences
which brought together students from both advanced and colonial
nations, and this interaction stimulated early student nationalism
in a number of countries, most notably in China.2
Specifically political organizations came somewhat later. The
Socialist Youth International was organized at a conference in
Stuttgart in 1907 and claimed 50,000 members in that year,
mostly from the German-speaking countries.3 Leftist students
in Germany, France, and Austria opposed the militarism of the
years before the first world war and were active in opposing the
war itself. The affiliates of the Socialist Youth International

were, in general, on the left of the European socialist movement.

With the war, however, most of the nascent international activity
came to an end and was revived only after 1918. The Riunion
des Etudiants Allijs, later called the Confidiration Internationale
des Etudiants (CIE), was started in r 9 z 9 by European student
unions from such countries as Britain, France, Belgium, and
Holland, which were interested in co-ordinating activities and
exchanging information4; later it expanded to include several
unions from Latin America (Mexico and Brazil were particularly
active). It was concerned primarily with non-political matters
such as cultural exchange and better conditions for students in
the universities. By 1937 it had representation from forty-two
national student unions and was recognized by the League of
Nations as the official international student organization. The
CIE’s subcommissions dealt with student travel, sports, intel-
lectual co-ordination, and the student press. Its orientation was
expressed in the term ’students as such’, which later became an
important concept in the international student movement.
’Students as such’ meant that the CIE was interested primarily
in matters concerning students as students, and not as members
of the broader society. This notion has been particularly marked
among European student unions with a strong syndicalist or
trade union approach.5 The CIE continued to function actively

2 See Y. C. Wang, Chinese Intellectuals and the West (Chapel Hill, I966).
3 G. Tyler, ’The International Socialist Youth Movement’, American Socialist
Quarterly (Winter I933), 52.
4
Jean Gallenca, ’The Confédération Internationale des Etudiants’, The
Student (June I957), I0.
5 See Frank Pinner, ’Student Trade Unionism in France, Belgium, and

I59
until the Germans occupied the organization’s Brussels head-
quarters in 1940 and destroyed its offices and files.
Communist student and youth organizations were quickly
organized after the success of the Russian Revolution, and
attracted many radical students. Under the leadership of Willi
Mfllzenberg, the Communist Youth International played an
active role in European student affairs in the inter-war period.6
The 1927 Brussels conference organized by the League against
Imperialism, offspring of the Communist International, attracted
almost 200 delegates, with a substantial representation from the
developing areas. Many of the participants were students or young
intellectuals. Socialist groups were also active during this period
and the Socialist International helped to organize conferences
and served as a co-ordinating centre for national youth and student
organizations. The politically oriented international groups
covered both students and youth, although a substantial proportion
of their leaders came from the ranks of politically sophisticated
students or ex-students. In most cases, the youth internationals
were on the left wing of their respective political movements.
None of the student organizations had a major impact on the
student community before the second world war; for the most
part, the student movements in Europe, where the international
bodies had their strongest influence, were neither very active
nor very militant during this period. Student activity was greater
in the colonial nations such as India, Burma, Indonesia, and in
a few African territories, but there the international associations
were very weak; the CIE carried more weight with the League
of Nations than with the students. The political groups may have
had a bit more success, but with the exception of the nationalist
student movements of the colonial areas, student communities
during the first third of the twentieth century were not sub-
stantially politicized.
The outbreak of in 1939 brought most student activity
war
in Europe halt;
to a much of the continent came under German
occupation and university life was disrupted. The main centre of
student activity was in England, where students from the occupied

Holland’, Sociology of Education (Spring I964), for a fuller discussion of student

syndicalism in Europe.
6 Jorgen Schleimann, ’The Life and Work of Willi Münzenberg’, Survey

(April I965).
I60
countries had gathered as political refugees. In 1941, on the
initiative of the British National Union of Students, the Inter-
national Council of Students was set up to co-ordinate the work
of the national student organizations and to maintain contact
between students in England and in the allied countries. It was
disbanded in 1944 to make way for a more inclusive body, the
International Union of Students. Two conferences, held in 1945
in London and Prague, paved the way for the foundation of the
IUS. The London meeting, attended by students from 38
countries, met to lay the groundwork for student co-operation.
Many of the delegates then left for Prague where another inter-
national student conference had been called by the Czech student
organization. At this meeting the International Union of Students
was founded by representatives of student organizations from
62 countries.7 The spirit of co-operation and the desire to prevent
a resurgence of fascism in Europe brought together otherwise

divergent groups. The main divisions, evident even at the found-

ing congress, were between the communist student organizations,
which gained control of the executive bodies of the IUS from
the beginning, and the student unions from western Europe,
many of which were primarily interested in preserving the idea
of a non-political international agency which would provide con-
crete services to the students of various countries. The fact that
many delegations from western countries had strong communist
minorities, which favoured a politically oriented movement,
added a further complication.
Communists and other leftist elements wished to create a
strongly political movement which could provide leadership and
direction to student unions in member countries, act as a militant
spokesman for university students, and take a prominent part
in the student struggle against colonialism, and specifically against
the western powers. This introduced a new element into the
international student movement, sharply at variance with the
orientation of the prewar CIE. The politicization of the student
movement was opposed by many of the west European and North
American student unions, and the Dutch student organization
refused to join the IUS because of the strong executive powers
given to the secretariat.8 Despite some opposition, the left was
7 See G. Van Mannen, The International Student Movement (The Hague,
8 Ibid., 48.
I966).
I6I
able to persuade the newly formed I U S to adopt its position, large-
ly because the desire for unity, the hope of establishing a united
international organization to press for social reform and oppose
any resurgence of fascism, were so strong after the war. Later,
when the spirit of unity had worn thin and the Cold War intruded
on the scene, it was this politicization of the student movement,

coupled with communist domination of the secretariat, which

was a major factor in causing the split in the movement which
occurred in 1950.
Prague was chosen as the headquarters for the IUS, and the
central office was given wide powers to speak on its behalf between
congresses. Representatives from the United States, Britain,
France, the USSR, Czechoslovakia, and several other countries
were represented in the secretariat, although from the outset
communists had a clear majority.9 For the first time in inter-
national student affairs, student unions from the developing areas
such as India, Indonesia, and Latin America, were directly in-
volved in the organization. In its early years, however, the I U S
was strongly Europe-oriented; it was not until the mid-1950s
that unions from Africa and Asia began to play an important role
in the movement.
The political situation within the IUS was never a simple one.
While it was clearly ’aligned’ in terms of the resolutions passed
at its international meetings and in the orientation of itsjournal,
there were a number of political tendencies within the secretariat
and among the affiliates. With few exceptions, the IUS member-
ship supported the ’socialist bloc’ in international affairs, but
interpretations of socialism differed, and factionalism dogged the
organization throughout most of its history. It is significant that
several former IUS officers later became outspoken liberals in
Czechoslovakia and in the French and Italian Communist Parties.
The outward pro-Soviet orientation of the IUS often obscured
real differences within the organization, and heated debates
marked many IUS meetings. It is possible that the IUS, and a
few similar international groups, provided one of the few relatively
open forums for discussion of political issues during the Stalinist
period in eastern Europe.
The IUS position on most international questions was pre-

9 J. Clews, Students Unite: The I US and Its Work (Paris, I952), 3.

I62
dictable. Colonialists were regularly denounced, and pro-Soviet
resolutions passed on such questions as the Marshall Plan, Nato,
and the Korean conflict. The I U S also made an effort to provide
services in non-political areas. Its publications featured not only
political articles but stories about student drama festivals, sports,
and some fiction; it was instrumental in founding the Federation
Internationale du Sport Universitaire (FISU) which sponsors
student olympics. Regional student conferences were organized
in various parts of the world which gave participants the oppor-
tunity to discuss social and cultural issues as well as political affairs.
The international student movement and the Cold War
By 1948 it was clear that the Cold War had become an integral
part of the international student scene. The coup d’etat in Czecho-
slovakia, which brought the communists to power, involved the
repression of several student demonstrations. In one protest,
students marched on the presidential palace demanding a con-
stitutional settlement of the government crisis, and were attacked
by communist-controlled police. Non-communists on the Execu-
tive Committee wanted the IUS to issue a protest, but the
communist-dominated committee refused to take any stand and
as a result American, Danish, and Swedish IUS members left.1o
The 1949 congress of the IUS, which met in Sofia a year after
the break between Stalin and Tito, revealed the extent of com-
munist control even more clearly; it attacked the Yugoslav student
organization and later expelled the Yugoslavs in violation of IUS
rules. This prompted a number of non-communist delegations
to leave the organization, and effectively destroyed its non-
partisan image. After 1950, the IUS was left largely with student
unions from the Soviet Union and its east European allies, with
a few unions from the developing areas, and a small minority of

increasingly disillusioned western unions. By 1956, the last west

European student union had severed its relations with the IUS.
The vacuum was soon filled. Twenty-one unions, mainly from
West Europe and North America, dissatisfied with the partisan
attitude of the I U S, met in Stockholm in r 95o to plan co-ordinated
activities. They set up a secretariat with strictly limited powers,
and stressed their commitment to international activity along
10 Institute for International Youth Affairs, The Youth Fronts: I946-66 (New
York, I966), I0.

I63
largely non-political lines. The influence of European ’student
syndicalist’ ideas was strong in the International Student Con-
ference, as the new organization came to be called; yet as it was
itself an offshoot of the tensions of the period, the I S C could not
avoid them altogether.
By 1950 the basic organizational framework of postwar inter-
national student politics had taken shape. The I S C, which started
humbly, gradually initiated a programme of publications, con-
ferences, and activities such as travel schemes, and began to
extend its influence into the newly emerging nations. 11 As western
governments saw the need for a counterweight to the IUS, the
financial situation of the newly formed I S C became brighter and
funds were available for its expanding programmes. The IUS con-
tinued its policy of opposition to any non-leftist participation in
its ranks until 1956, when it began to attract student unions from
the uncommitted developing areas and to promote international
student co-operation.
In an effort to avoid the political problems of the IUS, the
International Student Conference gave its executive office, called
the Co-ordinating Secretariat (Cosec), very little power. Cosec
officials were given responsibility for implementing the resolu-
tions of the semi-annual conferences but not for initiating pro-
grammes. The ISC’s commitment to the notion of ’students
as such’ remained strong in its early years, but by 1957 it was

expanded to include broader political concerns. The ISC had a

good deal of success in attracting non-European student unions;
and at its seventh conference in 1957 it had a membership of
73 affiliated bodies. While the I S C tried to be less openly political
in its approach and in its programmes than the IUS, both student
internationals reflected the tensions and conflicts of the Cold War,
and both were engaged in essentially similar activities. Regional
seminars were sponsored by both the IUS and ISC in Latin
America, Asia, and Africa, on topics ranging from colonialism to
cultural affairs and literacy. The IUS helped to build student
health centres in Peking and Calcutta, and both organizations
donated mimeograph machines, cameras, and other ’technical
assistance’ to national student unions. Representatives of both
11 See Hans Dall, ’The Logical Development of the Student Movement’, in
The International Student Movement: Past, Present, Future (Leiden, I963),
5-I5, for a summary of the history of the ISC.

I64
groups travelled extensivelyin the developing areas, attending
regional meetings and national student congresses, and trying to
win support for their organization; occasionally they attempted
to influence national unions by offers of technical help or other
assistance.
Recent trends in international politics have radically trans-
formed the international student movement. Both student inter-
nationals have seen deep internal schisms and unprecedented
ideological conflicts in the past decade, reflecting the changes on
the broader scene. The Hungarian uprising in 1956, followed by
the first indications of differences between the Soviet Union and
China, had major repercussions within the IUS. The ISC has
been split by the increasing independence of the French, and
also by the growing majority of student unions from the develop-
ing areas which have threatened the traditional authority of the
west European student unions.
In order to attract unions from Asia, Africa, and Latin America,
the internationals had to democratize their structure somewhat
and allow for freer discussion of many issues. The votes of these
newer unions proved a powerful force at international conferences.
The IUS has attempted to select favourable affiliates from the
developing areas and has, for example, recognized the All-India
Students Federation as the representative of Indian students.
This communist-dominated body is clearly one of many factions
within the student movement in India. Problems have also been
encountered with student organizations from Senegal and other
countries. The I S C has used similar political criteria in selecting
its members. Its Indian affiliate, the National Council of Univer-
sity Students of India is, like its pro-communist counterpart,
not representative of the majority of Indian students, and was
selected largely because of its political views. One of the ISC’s
major crises came at its 1962 conference, held in Quebec. About
27 delegations (out of a total of almost 80) left the conference over
a dispute involving the Pro-Independence Puerto Rican Student
Federation (FUPI).12 Thus, both student internationals have
been plagued by internal factionalism and have not hesitated to
use political manipulation in order to maintain the status quo.
In general, the I SC has been more open and more democratically

12 ’Tenth ISC’, Youth and Freedom, I962, 24.

I65
run than the IUS, but both have strayed from their principles
on a number of occasions.
The IUS has been shaken by the Sino-Soviet dispute, the
Soviet intervention in Czechoslovakia in 1968, and the general
decline of the international communist movement. From 1964
the Sino-Soviet dispute provoked acrimonious debates which
made the normal functioning of meetings difficult. Both the
Chinese and the Russians attempted to use IUS congresses as
sounding boards for their own viewpoints. The secretariat,
dominated by pro-Soviet elements, has not hesitated to turn off
the translation facilities when the Chinese delegates have taken
the floor. Much time has been taken up in disputes between the
Chinese and the Russians over matters of revolutionary tactics,
peaceful co-existence, and similar subjects. Although the Chinese
could muster only a handful of votes, observers have noted that
there has been substantial support for a militant view among
leftist unions from the developing areas.13 Since the ’Cultural
Revolution’, Chinese student delegations have been present at
few international events, and consequently this problem has
become less acute.
More important than the Sino-Soviet dispute, however, has
been the increasing militancy and independence of student unions
from the developing areas. The impact of the Cuban revolution
and of the Vietnamese struggle against the United States has
been very strong among student unions from Asia, Africa, and
Latin America. The revolutionary ideology of Che Guevara,
Ho Chi Minh, and other third world leaders has been influential
and has generally been opposed by the Soviet and east European
delegations to international student meetings, who have stressed
peaceful co-existence rather than revolution, and have not been
militant enough for many delegations from the third world.
The Czechoslovak intervention also caused a minor crisis in
the International Union of Students. The fact that the IUS
secretariat is located in Prague exacerbated the situation. Many
delegations demanded that the IUS take a strong stand against
the Soviet action, but the secretariat staff, including its Czech
president, refused, under what must have been strong Soviet
pressure, to take any stand on the issue. As a result, I U S officers
13 Frank Griffiths, Sino-Soviet Conflict at the Seventh I US Congress (Ottawa,
I962), 3.
I66
could not call a meeting of their Executive Committee until many
months after the crisis had abated.
The constant factionalism, the concern with passing resolutions
of significance in Cold War terms, has meant virtually nothing
to the affiliated unions and the delegates at international meetings.
Both internationals have spent a great deal of time and money
to ensure that ’correct’ resolutions emerged from meetings and
conferences. But these efforts have been looked upon with a
mixture of good humour and cynicism by most national unions,
particularly those from the developing countries. Individuals
involved in international student affairs are well aware of the
ideological biases of the ISC and IUS, and feel that it is more
important to be able to obtain travel funds to international
meetings than to assert their own views there. When student
delegations have asserted themselves, as in the case of the
Puerto Ricans in the ISC, and the Japanese Zengakuren and
the Chinese in the IUS, their protests have received substan-
tial support from the delegations. Thus, many of the ideological
disputes are meaningless in terms of the political education of the
delegates, or in terms of impact on student unions around the
world.
The fact that both the I U S and the I S C are dependent to an
overwhelming degree on outside financial support is a key to
understanding their orientation in the past 20 years. This kind
of financial dependence is not limited to the major international
student groups; almost all organizations, from the World Student
Christian Federation to the Young Communist International of
the i 92os, have been financially supported from the outside. The
cost of international meetings, large-scale publications, and the
other activities in which they engage, are beyond the financial
resources of university students.
That the International Union of Students has been supported
by Soviet and Czech government funds almost from the outset
is well known; the financial dependence of the International
Student Conference on western financial sources, however, came
as a surprise to many largely because of that body’s emphasis on

independence and freedom from outside controls or coercion.

In March 1967 the ISC was accused of having received sub-
stantial funds from a private American agency, the Foundation
for Youth and Student Affairs, which had been named as a
I67
 ’conduit’ for the Central Intelligence Agency. 14 These accusations
followed the admission by the United States National Student
Association (USNSA) that the greater part of its finances came
from the CIA.15 The USNSA has been one of the strongest
supporters of the ISC, and American representatives held key
positions on its secretariat. The ISC denied any links with the
CIA and appointed a special commission to investigate the
charges. The commission found that a large proportion of the
I S C budget came from American foundations and that the source
of these funds was unclear, but it denied that the CIA dictated
ISC policy.16 A number of student unions have been sceptical
of the commission’s findings and have resigned from the ISC in
protest.
Recently the I S C has in some respects become more like its
rival; at its 1964 conference, its structure was changed to give the
secretariat power to initiate programmes. It has also abandoned
the concept of ’students as such’ and recognized the necessity
for student organizations to take an active part in the affairs of
society. While the I S C has moved in a more ideological direction,
largely under pressure from student unions in developing areas,
the IUS has moved towards a less political position in order to
convince student unions that it is not a mere spokesman for
Soviet policy. Although major political differences persist, the
two internationals have organizationally become more alike. Both
seem to be trying to begin to meet the needs of their constituents.
Each student organization has not only claimed to be the most
representative voice of students, but has stressed the concept of
international student unity. Almost all student conferences of
both groups have passed resolutions calling for unity and seminars
have been held on this topic. Despite these resolutions, however,
it seems clear that neither really desires unity, since the divisions
within the student movement have been a major raison d’être
for the existence of the two groups.17 With unity some political
14 ’Foundation
Cited as Conduit of C I A to Finance NSA’, Washington Post,
17 February I967, A5.
15 Sol Stem, ‘NSA: CIA’,
Ramparts, (March I967), 33.
16 See
Report of the Investigation Commission Concerning Recent Charges
Against the International Student Conference (Leiden, I967), for ISC views on
the CIA crisis.
17 See International Union
of Students, Report of the IUS Delegation to the
Vlth ISC (Prague, I957) ; J. Pelikan, ’What Helps and Hinders Co-operation’,

I68
goals would have to be abandoned, and the degree of control by
communist (or non-communist) representatives which has charac-
terized the movement could no longer be exercised.
The general political situation has created severe stresses for
both organizations. Their dependence on outside sources for
financial and ideological support has meant that the internationals
have responded in a doctrinaire fashion to political changes and
these responses have not always met with the approval of the
constituent national unions. With the decreasing intensity of the
Cold War and the growing internal stresses within each organiza-
tion, there are pressures toward unity. Demands from unions
from the developing countries for the student internationals to
meet their needs and to provide more concrete help have grown
and the increased voting strength of these unions may produce
some reforms.

Structure and programmes of the international student movement

While the development of the international student organiza-
tions reflects the divergences and conflicts of the Cold War, their
programmes and structure do not differ as greatly. Both have tried
to provide services for their affiliated unions, to attract wider
support, and to offer leadership. Political pressures have often
meant that the service aspects have been ignored. In the last
analysis, the international groups have failed either to provide
constructive leadership to the student community or to serve
student unions in a meaningful way.
Both groups are organized around international conferences
which are held every two or three years. These are the highest
decision-making authorities of the respective organizations and
are responsible for formulating basic policy and guidelines for
activities. Each claims over 70 affiliated national unions (although
a number of these belong to both organizations), and the inter-
national congresses attract several hundred delegates and many
observers. At these meetings student leaders from around the
world have an opportunity to discuss political issues informally
and to share common experiences (travelling expenses are met
by the international bodies). Much of the time at these con-
World Student News, No. 2/3 (I963), I6. The ISC view of the unity question
is stated in ’The IIth International Student Conference’, News Features of the
Institute for International Youth Affairs, 27 July I964, 2.

I69
ferences is spent in debating resolutions on such matters as

Portuguese colonialism, nuclear testing, or literacy programmes

in Bolivia, and in more acrimonious debates between opposing
political factions. Much of this is not particularly relevant to most
of the delegates, who seem to find the opportunity for travel and
the informal contacts made more valuable than the official sessions.
The clue to the functioning of the international student move-
ment is to be found not in the congresses but in their executive
committees and secretariats. These bodies make the key decisions
concerning politics regardless of constitutional provisions; the
IUS Executive Committee has wide powers to make policy,
suggest new programmes, and provide political leadership. The
ISC Co-ordinating Secretariat was, until recently, severely cir-
cumscribed in its powers, and even at present has fewer powers
than its IUS counterpart. A Supervision Committee, made up
of representatives of tstudent unions, meets regularly to oversee
the work of the secretariat. In both cases the secretariats, because
of their day-to-day involvement in the organization and their
power to disburse funds and travel subsidies, have very sub-
stantial power. Members of the secretariats make frequent trips
to keep in touch with unions around the world, to provide political
leadership and occasional services, and to make sure that the rival
organization is not getting an advantage.
If the international movement has any relevance to its affiliated
members and the millions of students it claims to represent, this
is seen in its activities, on which a great deal of money is spent,
probably at least one million dollars annually by the two major
groups. The result of all these efforts is, for the average student,
very limited indeed. It is unlikely, for example, that more than
a handful of them in a country with several hundred thousand

university students even know of the main international student

organizations. Yet the movement does reach a substantial number
of student leaders through publications and meetings.
Both groups have active publication programmes which include
monthly magazines issued in a number of languages. The ISC
journal, Student, is issued in English, French, and Spanish editions
and has a circulation of about 8000 throughout the world. It
features accounts of I S C activities as well as articles about univer-
sity systems and student affairs in selected countries. Reports of
student agitation in Spain or the struggle against the Portuguese in
I70
Angola can be found alongside articles on student drama festivals.
In the last few years it has been focused increasingly on the
developing areas with articles on the role of students in national
integration and similar topics. While many of the articles in
Student deal with political subjects, the magazine has tried to
avoid becoming a political journal.
World Student News, the journal of the IUS, is published in
German, Russian, and Czech in addition to English, French,
and Spanish, and its circulation is substantially higher than that
of Student; it has been more political in its orientation, although
it too has tried to appeal to the mainstream of the world student
community. Articles on the Vietnamese National Liberation
Front, on racial discrimination in the United States, or on British
colonialism in South Arabia are interspersed with stories about
student chess tournaments or cultural activities. Both journals
are distributed widely to university students throughout the

world, as well as to affiliated unions, although it is impossible to

gauge their influence.
In addition to these magazines, there are news bulletins giving
information on student activities around the world, and pamphlets
on many subjects are issued by both groups. The Research and
Information Commission of the ISC compiles thorough reports
on student politics and higher education in different countries
and circulates this information to student groups and government
officials. These reports have dealt with student problems in
Angola, East Germany, Spain, and the United States. The IUS
has published pamphlets on education in the Soviet Union,
colonialism and education, and other topics. While much of the
information contained in these publications is well documented
and relevant, the political orientation of the material often limits
its usefulness.
In addition to these publications, the internationals have spon-
sored regional student conferences on such topics as Asian student
co-operation, community development in new nations, and the
student press. These conferences are among their most useful
activities, since they provide an opportunity for students from a
given region to meet and discuss a topic of direct relevance to
them. Early regional student meetings in Latin America, for
example, were instrumental in publicizing the idea of university
reform which swept that continent in the 1920S. Later conferences
I7I
were responsible for the formation of the Pan African Student
Conference, and have given African students with common
educational and political problems a unique opportunity to meet.
The IUS has been co-sponsor, with the World Federation of
Democratic Youth (WFDY), of nine World Youth Festivals
which have attracted up to 30,000 students and young people
from around the world for a week of cultural, political, and sports
activities; these festivals have been the major undertaking of the
communist-oriented student movement. All but two of them
have been held in Soviet bloc countries; the two most recent were
held in Vienna and Helsinki.lAlthough these affairs are very
expensive (some independent sources estimate that a festival can
cost as much as $25 million),19 the organizers apparently feel
that they are useful in demonstrating the advantages of the com-
munist system. Many of the delegates have been given free trips
to Soviet bloc nations following the festivals. The clear political
tone of these events has, however, caused many western student
groups to boycott the festivals, although there is usually a sub-
stantial participation from the developing areas.
Recent events have demonstrated the political failure of the
traditional international student organizations, and have proved
that effective organizing on an international scale is very difficult.
The current wave of student activism, which can perhaps be
traced back to the Japanese student demonstrations in 1960
against the Security Treaty with the United States, have taken
place entirely outside the framework of the student internationals.
In fact, the militant activists from both eastern and western Europe
have nothing but contempt for the I U S and I S C, which are seen
as representing the ’Establishment’ positions of the Soviet Union
and the United States. Leaders of both internationals have tried
to relate their organizations to current student activism, but have
so far been unable to do so.
It is significant that the financial backing has recently become
more difficult, The exposure of the USNSA and the ISC as

recipients of CIA funds, as well as the increasing ineffectiveness

of ISC programmes, has led the foundations and government

18 ’To the Finland Station’, Youth and Freedom, No. 4 (I962), presents a
discussion of the World Youth Festivals. See also Independent Research Service,
Report on the Vienna Youth Festival (New York, I960).
19 ’Festival
Financing’, Youth and Freedom, No. 4 (I962), 6.
I72
agencies which have financed the I S C to reconsider their support.
Similarly, the Soviet Union has been re-evaluating its support of
the I U S in the light of its failure to win leadership in apparently
left-wing movements in western Europe. Moscow has no doubt
also been dissatisfied with the inability of the IUS to restrain
Czechoslovak students from taking a strong anti-Russian position
since the intervention of August 1968.
A new international movement has developed entirely without
the participation of the traditional student internationals. Student
leaders from western Europe, and to a lesser extent from the
United States, are in communication with each other, but efforts
to establish a formal organizational structure or to initiate effective
co-ordination have not proved successful.
Perhaps effective political co-ordination of disparate student
groups in many countries is impossible. This may be especially
true of the ’New Left’ student organizations, which are very
radical but have no clear ideological position. In addition, major
student concerns differ from country to country, and the nature
of the organizations in terms of support, ideological trends,
development, and similar factors show substantial variations.
Nevertheless, there have been a number of internationally co-
ordinated demonstrations, concerning the Vietnam war and other
issues; they were organized independently of the I U S and I S C,
seemingly with no permanent organizational framework. It is
clear then that the I U S and I S C have not met the needs of
university students - not even of the activist minority among
them - and their future seems bleak. Militant and revolutionary
student organizations in many countries find them irrelevant,
while more moderate student movements reject their pronounced
political views. Yet, almost in spite of themselves, they have played
some constructive roles. The fact that regional student organiza-
tions were set up on their initiative is important, and their publica-
tions are widely circulated. A recently established IUSjournal,
Democratic Education, is one of the most open and imaginative
publications concerned with academic reform appearing in Europe.
Student travel schemes and tours and student delegations have
stimulated international contacts, and although assistance was
often given for political reasons, it has helped the unions in
developing countries.
The fact remains that the international student movement has
I73
been a failure, mainly because of its dependence on outside forces
and its lack of responsiveness to the needs and preoccupations
of the students themselves. The lesson of the international move-
ment is similar to that of Berkeley and Berlin: the student move-
ment cannot be manipulated and student radicalism almost always
goes against the canons of ideological doctrine, right or left.

Postscript
Shortly after the completion of this article, in February 1969, the
International Student Conference was disbanded by its Supervision
Committee. The reason given was lack of funds.
The crisis which followed the disclosures about CIA financial aid
for the ISC nearly two years earlier had not been resolved ; the con-
fidence of many of its staunchest supporters, such as the Finnish and
Danish unions, was undermined, and without CIA funds the ISC was
unable to continue its activities.
This has created a vacuum in international student politics which
may possibly be filled by a ’liberalized’ international union of students.
Whether that happens or not, it is likely that the increasingly militant
student trends in west Europe, combined with the dissatisfaction of
many of the national unions in the developing areas, will produce some
notable changes in the international student movement.

I74