5 THE POST-WAR DECLINE OF THE INTERNATIONAL STUDIES CONFERENCE 429resources to publicise its work and because of the ‘apathy of numerous
governments, such as that of Great-Britain.’^7 Mayoux told Bidault that
the IIIC had never served as an instrument of the Vichy government or
Nazi Germany and that the IIIC had never succumbed to the ‘tempta-
tion of serving French cultural imperialism’.^8 At the same time, it should
be noted that Renoliet records that in a letter sent to Bidault in August,
Mayoux, after having noted that the IIIC had faithfully served the inter-
nationalist cause, pointed out that the IIIC had ‘contributed strongly to
the influence and prestige of France’ and insisted that it was because of
its contribution in this regard that it was now being challenged by ‘rival
ambitions’.^9
Mayoux’s dedicated campaign was carried on in the pages of a special
issue of the institute’s bulletin which appeared in the period leading up to
the London Conference and which went under the heading of Coopération
Intellectuelle Internationale. The special issue, which was dated October–
November 1945, was the first IIIC bulletin to be published in the period
immediately after the Occupation. Within its pages, it detailed the history
of recent discussions of educational and cultural questions at international
conferences: at Dumbarton Oaks, Chalpultepec, and San Francisco.^10
In view of the forthcoming London Conference, the special issue
reproduced both the CAME and the French proposals for the organisa-
tion of educational and culture on an international basis. In addition, it
reproduced a letter that had been annexed to the French proposal and
which was addressed by Bidault as minister of foreign affairs to Alfred
Duff Cooper, the British ambassador at Paris. The letter commenced by
noting that it was a French initiative, which had been conveyed to the
League by Bourgeois, that had lead to the creation of the ICIC and that
it was France which through the offices of Herriot had offered the IIIC
to the League.^11
The same letter went on to outline what the French government con-
sidered to be important points of difference between the French and
(^7) Mayoux, 1945, quoted in Renoliet, L’UNESCO oubliée, 174. Renoliet points out that
the words all the directions were underlined in the letter (ibid., 174n).
(^8) Ibid.
(^9) Mayoux, 1945, quoted in Renoliet, L’UNESCO oubliée, 171.
(^10) ‘Les Questions Éducatives et Culturelles dans les récentes Conférences Internationales,’
numéro spécial, Coopération Intellectuelle Internationale (octobre–novembre 1945): 27–8.
(^11) Coopération Intellectuelle Internationale [c] (octobre–novembre 1945), 40.