them some general questions. The results turned out to be kaleidoscopic, but not
useless.55
As we saw in the historical survey multilateral international archival
co-operation, in particular that on a global scale, is a recent phenomenon. Only
in a few (mainly European) instances there were already international relations
in operation in the 19th century, based on common traditions and structures.
For this kind of co-operation an international body like ICA or its predecessors
had no significance. The same applies also to many kinds of bilateral contacts
which are being maintained and developed by archivists in neighbouring
countries all over the world and appear to involve a growing number of
archivists. These activities include not only joint meetings and the establishing
of study groups, but also the exchange of personnel, joint training programmes
and the production of finding-aids and publications of sources of mutual
interest, etc.
As a result, only a small minority of countries have international contacts
only through ICA. Nevertheless, ICA is for approximately 50% of the respon
dents the most important framework for their foreign relations. The general
appreciation of the significance of international contacts and co-operation is,
not surprisingly, higher in developing countries than in Europe. Despite the
almost unanimous recognition of the positive impact of international archival
co-operation on theory and practice of archives and records administration,
a majority of the respondents is more or less disappointed in the results.
The reasons are many and diverse: complaints are voiced about the lack of
adequate advance information about opportunities and activities which are
being organised, about the neglect of differences in development levels, about
language and terminological difficulties and political conflicts. A striking
element I consider to be the reproach of some respondents that "international"
still seems to be identical with "European". There is an apparent annoyance
caused by what is being perceived as the continuing dominance of a few particu
lar cultures, be it perhaps only because English and French still are the main
languages in international contacts. Obviously many colleagues can not see that
in international relations language is only a tool for communication, the hand
ling of which many of us have to learn deliberately having been educated in
another linguistic environment. Trying to express oneself in a foreign language is
therefore not identical with submission to the primacy of an alien culture.
Nevertheless, a general feeling that entire cultures are being undervalued,
neglected or even discriminated against is apparent, and influences the apprecia
tion of international relations in a negative way.
Not mentioned as one of the causes of disappointment, but psychologically the
most important one is the fact that people simply tend to have to high-flown
expectations of the benefits international co-operation can bring. This applies to
young countries as well as to older ones. Archivists in the Third World were often
mistaken in thinking that their worthy colleagues from the old world, who
evidently had achieved so much and therefore were thought to be influential
people, could substantially help them in setting up archives systems, furnishing
equipment, even building new accommodation.56
Archivists in the industrialised countries, underestimating the problems
and overestimating their own possibilities seem to have thought that the intro
duction of Western archival civilisation was within reach. Others, taking part in
international meetings, simply screw too high their demands as to the quality of
papers and discussions. Colleagues who have reached a certain level of
excellence in some specialism feel annoyed when obliged to attend speeches
which are too general or superficial, sit out boring debates on procedural
questions, and see themselves deprived of the possibility to discuss the issues
which are really important to them.
This last remark brings me to the divergent opinions about the significance
of congresses and CITRAs. Among my respondents there are colleagues who see
these global meetings without restriction as the most important contributions to
the development of the profession. Others think these meetings have become
outdated, too big, too formal, and, in fact, superfluous. The critics of the ICA
congresses stress the importance of European conferences like those which were
heldin 1985, 1989, 1993, and 1994, especially the KVAN-congress in Maastricht
1991 with its offer of parallel meetings on a variety of issues.
Some respondents draw attention to the fact that the follow-up of hundreds
of recommendations and resolutions is not provided for or even being
monitored. As a consequence they are frequently no more than a shot in the
dark leaving the whole meticulous procedure of formulating balanced state
ments as a mere game, imitating international politics.
A related problem, the lack of evaluation of activities, affects even those
projects which are unanimously looked at as real achievements of the inter
national archival community, such as the Guides to the Sources of Nations and
the RAMP studies. I doubt whether anyone has an insight into the distribution
and use of ICA publications, but it is felt with some anxiety that reality might
fail to correspond with the intentions. As far as the Guides are concerned it has
already been pointed out that even in the countries of the target group the pro
ducts of this project were sometimes fully unknown and nowhere available!57
Into the results of the Records and Archives Management Programme (RAMP)
an inquiry has been carried out by Michael Roper recently.58
There is an evident want of better procedures for the distribution of the
proceedings of special conferences and seminars. In general ICA publications
DE PROFESSIE
551 wish to thank the colleagues of the following institutions and associations who took the trouble to
answer my questionnaire: Australian Archives, Osterreichisches Staatsarchiv, Archivo Nacional de Cuba,
State Archives of Cyprus, Rigsarkivet Denmark, Public Library of Dominica, National Archives of Finland,
Landeshauptarchiv Koblenz, Landesarchiwerwaltung Thüringen, Archives Nationales Haïti, National
Archives of Japan, Latvijas Republikas Valsts Arhivu, General Directorate of the Lithuanian Archives,
Arsip National Indonesia, Archivo General de la Nación Mexico, National Archives New Zealand,
Riksarkivet Norway, Archivo General de la Nación Peru, Naczelna Dyrekcja Archiwów Panstwowych
Poland, Rosarkhiv Russia, Direction des Archives du Sénégal, National Archives Singapore, Arhiv Republike
Slovenije, Department of National Archives Sri Lanka, Riksarkivet Sweden, State Archives Turkey, National
Archives United Arabic Emirates, Public Record Office of Northern Ireland, Archives of Yugoslavia,
174
JAN VAN DEN BROEK FROM BRUSSELS TO BEIJING
Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Archive und Bibliotheken in der Evangelischen Kirche, Japan Society of Archives
Institutions, Landelijke Kring van Gemeente- en Streekarchivarissen the Netherlands, Arhivsko Drustvo
Slovenije, Asociación Espanola de Archiveros, Bibliotecarios, Museólogos y Documentalistas, Norwegian
Association of Archivists.
56 See e.g. Joshua C. Enwere, "Archival Europe and the archival world", Janus 2 (1992), p. 334: "Could it be
that many European countries do not regard ICA as a worthy agency to execute international assistance?"
57 Franz, "Mikrofilmprogramm", p. 10.
58 Michael Roper, with the assistance of Carol Couture, Impact evaluation of the Records and Archives
Management Programme (RAMP) of the General Information Programme (PGI) (Paris, 1993).
175