{"@context":"http://iiif.io/api/presentation/3/context.json","id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/iiif/1z41r6n57p/manifest","type":"Manifest","label":{"en":["Public Policy Forum, University of Houston, 1984 March 3"]},"logo":"https://d9jk7wjtjpu5g.cloudfront.net/organizations/logo_images/000/000/013/original/yale-blue.png?1678220072","metadata":[{"label":{"en":["Identifier"]},"value":{"en":["mssa.ms.1981 (EAD ID)","MS 1981  (Call Number)","ms_1981_s07_b0908.u.mov (Digital Object ID)"]}},{"label":{"en":["Format"]},"value":{"en":["videocassettes_(u-matic)"]}},{"label":{"en":["Date"]},"value":{"en":["1984 March 3 (Creation)"]}},{"label":{"en":["Description"]},"value":{"en":["https://preservica.library.yale.edu/explorer/explorer.html#prop:4\u0026amp;af6a4d60-76e2-4751-93db-45f48c64bfb3 (Other Finding Aid Note)"]}},{"label":{"en":["Language"]},"value":{"en":[]}},{"label":{"en":["Rights Statement"]},"value":{"en":["The materials are open for research.","Researchers must register and agree to the Yale University Library User Agreement for Special Collections before accessing audiovisual material in this collection."]}},{"label":{"en":["Publisher"]},"value":{"en":["Manuscripts and Archives, Yale University Library."]}},{"label":{"en":["Source Metadata URI"]},"value":{"en":["https://archives.yale.edu/repositories/12/archival_objects/2076693"]}},{"label":{"en":["Preferred Citation"]},"value":{"en":["Public Policy Forum, University of Houston, 1984 March 3. Henry A. Kissinger Papers, Part II (MS 1981). Manuscripts and Archives, Yale University Library. https://archives.yale.edu/repositories/12/resources/5211."]}}],"summary":{"en":["https://preservica.library.yale.edu/explorer/explorer.html#prop:4\u0026af6a4d60-76e2-4751-93db-45f48c64bfb3"]},"requiredStatement":{"label":{"en":["Attribution"]},"value":{"en":["The materials are open for research.","Researchers must register and agree to the Yale University Library User Agreement for Special Collections before accessing audiovisual material in this collection."]}},"provider":[{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/aboutus","type":"Agent","label":{"en":["Manuscripts and Archives Yale University Library"]},"homepage":[{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/","type":"Text","label":{"en":["Manuscripts and Archives Yale University Library"]},"format":"text/html"}],"logo":[{"id":"https://d9jk7wjtjpu5g.cloudfront.net/organizations/logo_images/000/000/013/original/yale-blue.png?1678220072","type":"Image"}]}],"thumbnail":[{"id":"https://d9jk7wjtjpu5g.cloudfront.net/collection_resource_files/thumbnails/000/072/923/small/open-uri20200228-764-1np5byd_1582903435.jpg?1582885435","type":"Image","format":"image/jpeg"}],"items":[{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923","type":"Canvas","label":{"en":["Media File 1 of 1 - open-uri20200228-764-1np5byd.mov"]},"duration":1829.435,"width":640,"height":360,"thumbnail":[{"id":"https://d9jk7wjtjpu5g.cloudfront.net/collection_resource_files/thumbnails/000/072/923/small/open-uri20200228-764-1np5byd_1582903435.jpg?1582885435","type":"Image","format":"image/jpeg"}],"items":[{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/content/1","type":"AnnotationPage","items":[{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/content/1/annotation/1","type":"Annotation","motivation":"painting","body":{"id":"https://aviary-p-yalemssa.s3.wasabisys.com/collection_resource_files/resource_files/000/072/923/original/open-uri20200228-764-1np5byd.mov?1582885434","type":"Video","format":"video/mp4","duration":1829.435,"width":640,"height":360},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923","metadata":[]}]}],"annotations":[{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760","type":"AnnotationPage","label":{"en":["ms_1981_s07_b0908_transcript.txt [Transcript]"]},"items":[{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/1","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\n\u003e\u003e [SOUND].\nThe following program is made possible by a grant from Exxon company USA. Public Policy Forum is produced by the Center For Public Policy at the University of Houston.\n\u003e\u003e Good evening, I'm Tom Mayor from the University of Houston Center For Public Policy. Tonight's distinguished guest is former Secretary of State Henry A Kissinger.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=0.0,112.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/2","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nOur panelists are Professors Joseph Nogy of the University of Houston and John Spanier of the University of Florida. The topic tonight is American foreign policy. Dr Kissinger, detente seems to be dead, and Soviet-American relations appear to have deteriorated in recent years. Is this undesirable, and if so, what should the United States be doing?\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=112.0,142.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/3","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\n\n\u003e\u003e Well, I think that relations with the Soviet Union are not good. But then, it's hard to think of a period in which they have been all that extraordinary. People always say we're going back to the Cold War, but if you look at any ten year period rather than in any one or two year period, in every ten year period there has been more or less the same cycle.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=142.0,169.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/4","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nAnd I think right now the Soviet Union is resisting a strengthening of NATO as they did in the 50s and in the 60s. And as they are doing now, I think what we should do is more or less what the administration is doing. Show a willingness to negotiate, indicate to the Soviets that the lines of communication are open, establish a complete program for our policy.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=169.0,199.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/5","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nBut if we show any excessive eagerness, we will merely be tempting Soviet pressures.\n\u003e\u003e There have been some speculation in the press that rhetoric seems to be important, such as the President's speech about the evil empire.\n\u003e\u003e Yes, I've heard that statement very often about the focus of evil.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=199.0,224.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/6","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nI might if someone asked my opinion I might not have recommended using that particular phrase. On the other hand, to create the impression that the Soviet leaders are such sensitive flowers that our president makes one statement to a very special audience concerned with their problems. And they are then insulted forever after, that is just absurd.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=224.0,248.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/7","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nI bet that if you put a researcher to work on any one month set of issues of Prafta. And took out what Soviet polit-bureau members are saying in the normal course of events to their own public about the United States. You would find statements infinitely tougher than what President Reagan said.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=248.0,270.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/8","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nAnd on top of it, you'd find them repeated day after day, so it may have been a slightly too muscular phraseology, but the Soviets have used it now to put us on the defensive and to get us to apologize. And that's the way they begin every negotiation.\n\u003e\u003e Dr. Kissinger, there's been a change of leadership in the Soviet Union recently.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=270.0,293.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/9","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nAnd we hear talks about new beginnings and new opportunities. Does it really matter very much who constitutes the leadership in the Soviet Union in terms of US Soviet relations?\n\u003e\u003e I think it is a great mistake to believe that a new General Secretary of the Communist Party can come in.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=293.0,311.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/10","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nThat's the key position. And then announce that on basis of his own personal conviction he can change their policies. It is a collection of bureaucracies. And therefore, the personal views of any one man are not that incisive. Secondly, Chenyenko, doesn't strike me as the strongest man in the world.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=311.0,336.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/11","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nHe just lost a leadership struggle, 15 months ago. So I think there is an opportunity to negotiate. Not because Andropov died, not because there is, because Chernenko will make a new beginning. But because the Soviet leaders are aging. Because they're reaching a, they are in an almost chronic succession crisis.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=336.0,359.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/12","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nAnd because their economy is a mess. And therefore I think they need a period of respite just as they did after the death of Stalin.\n\u003e\u003e Do you see any value in a summit meeting this year some time?\n\u003e\u003e I do not favor a summit meeting unless there have been negotiations that have gone very far.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=359.0,382.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/13","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nAnd the president and the Soviet leader can then do the concluding phase of the negotiation. I think an unprepared summit meeting or a symbolic summit meeting will give the Soviets. It will either backfire or it will give the Soviets the idea that they can relieve tension simply by atmospherics and a year or so afterwards we would be worse off than before.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=382.0,410.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/14","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\n\n\u003e\u003e Just one brief follow up. During the period of the Nixon presidency, there seemed to be almost a tendency developed toward institutionalized summitry. That is, on a regular basis.\n\u003e\u003e We didn't have our first summit until 1972, that was four years after Reagan or three and a half years after Nixon came in to office.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=410.0,434.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/15","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nAt that time we had signed whole host of agreements that had been prepared for an extended period of time. Once that has been accomplished, I think, then indeed there were two more summits. In retrospect, I think, we then made the mistake I believe, of trying to have agreements at every summit and you can't prepare that many agreements that quickly.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=434.0,459.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/16","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nI think once a different relationship exists, an occasional meeting of the president and the Soviet general secretary, simply to review the situation would have some merits. But in the present circumstances, I think it would be dangerous.\n\u003e\u003e Let me switch it slightly to American politics. You've often talked about the problems of the conducting of foreign policy.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=459.0,489.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/17","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nTo what extent do you think these problems result from the very nature of our system? That is, for example, harking back to your earlier years in office, Dayton with the offering of incentives, particularly economic incentives. The attempt to cut them off, to impose sanctions on the Soviets if they didn't behave themselves was a degree of self-restraint.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=489.0,511.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/18","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nIt's very difficult to do when the Senate can pass a. When you have interest for troops in this country like the prophet they like cool cash rather than cold war I was wondering if prompts of our system and the difficulties it posses for the steadiness that your policies call for?\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=511.0,540.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/19","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\n\n\u003e\u003e The policies that I favor and indeed any meaningful foreign policy requires steadiness. You have to be able to carry it out over an extended period of time. Because otherwise, neither your adversaries nor your friends know what you're going to do. You become an element of instability. And you generate delays on the part of your adversaries, if not pressure, and a sort of neutralism on the part of your allies.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=540.0,571.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/20","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nNow, the interesting question is to what extent is that inherent in our system or to what extent has it been closed by the catastrophes of the last decade. I think much of it has been caused by the dislocations of Watergate and to a lesser extent the Vietnam war.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=571.0,590.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/21","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nWhich we can be executive authority and strengthen the Congressional authority. Under present conditions it is very difficult, because every Congressman, in fact every journalist thinks he can be his own Secretary of State and go off and And negotiate and yes you have pressure groups, there is another problem that our present system of selecting a President tends over a period of time to produce people who are not oriented towards a substance.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=590.0,630.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/22","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nThey are oriented toward special interest groups. So, we have a lot of internal changes that need to be addressed.\n\u003e\u003e Do you have any suggestions about, are there structural changes that you might recommend?\n\u003e\u003e Well I think, well truthful I think within the executive branch Of course, differs from President to President.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=630.0,665.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/23","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nI think under present circumstances, there's perhaps so much rivalry between the various departments, that they consume an excessive amount of their time in bureaucratic maneuvering.\n\u003e\u003e And I think it's somewhat greater insistence and coherence would be necessary, as between the Executive branch and the Congress. I really don't have any very brilliant ideas.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=665.0,695.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/24","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nI think after the election, whoever is elected ought to make a major effort to bring about a bipartisan foreign policy by perhaps associating some of the leaders of the Congress in some of his internal deliberations. But the problem is if they don't show restraint, if they use the information to conduct an even more Independent policy the thing will backfire.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=695.0,726.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/25","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nI once made the experiment when I was Secretary of State of showing our cables to a group of Congressman concerned with a particular issue. Then started arguing with our replies and they got themselves into the cable drafting business and we have to stop it after a few weeks, but if this continues when you take and whatever you think of the wisdom of having american forces in Peru.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=726.0,753.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/26","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nIt's for the reason if you wanted to honorably\n\u003e\u003e Some success, we had to be in a position where we could bargain about it. But when the congress simultaneously votes a resolution to take them out, you didn't have to be a genius on the other side just to outweight us.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=753.0,772.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/27","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\n\n\u003e\u003e But given that, is it one thing to cough at bipartisanship, but the consensus is just dead. And if you really look at the the Democratic parties, the Republican parties have really deeply conflicting opinions now about the nature of the conflict with the Soviet Union, about the use of force.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=772.0,796.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/28","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nThe Henry Jackson wing of the party is dead, and the whole center of gravity on the party is swung.\n\u003e\u003e I'm extremely worried. I saw that one of the democratic candidates was accusing the other.\n\u003e\u003e Yeah.\n\u003e\u003e That he was favoring the so-called build down concept which requires the destruction of two nuclear weapons for every new one we build\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=796.0,822.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/29","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\n\n\u003e\u003e And he attacked the man on the ground that I would use, that we keep that up and pretty soon, we won't have any weapons left. But on the ground that it was too tough, it permitted the building of new weapons.\n\u003e\u003e [LAUGH]\n\u003e\u003e So, if you have a competition in\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=822.0,840.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/30","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\n\n\u003e\u003e And who can be softer? You have a very real problem. There is no answer to that. All one can say in general is this, either we're gonna solve the problem of bipartisanship or we're gonna suffer one debacle after another in foreign policy and the American public won't stand for it.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=840.0,861.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/31","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nAnd then, they will have to be an electoral battle on it. This is not a losing people.\n\u003e\u003e You think this is a principal disadvantage we face against the Soviets. Their Foreign Minister for example, Gromyko's been around for 30 years, certainly lends some great stability. Is that one of the principle problems?\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=861.0,882.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/32","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\n\n\u003e\u003e Well, stability's good only if your politics is correct.\n\u003e\u003e Yeah.\n\u003e\u003e [LAUGH]\n\u003e\u003e I think one of the assets the Soviets have is that enormous persistance when confronting the eagerness to come to an agreement of a group of western countries. Because keeps repeating the same proposition week after week, month after month.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=882.0,902.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/33","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nThe western nations feel that there's something wrong with a deadlock that continues forever and they're always or seemingly forever and they always pressure to come up with a new idea and the Soviets in turn circle watching this knowing we're gonna try to come up with new ideas have an incentive to produce a dead lock.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=902.0,925.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/34","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nSo we're achieving the opposite of what we want at the other end. With all our weaknesses I wouldn't trade our system for theirs has been built in rigidities glamicos now 74. It has been in for 30 years but when he dies has to be replaced because of the age.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=925.0,949.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/35","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nWhat are they gonna do? That has been a one man show for 30 years.\n\u003e\u003e I wonder if we might discuss your recent proposal for What we might call europeanizing NATO. You've long argued the central importance of NATO to American foreign policy and you've made a very significant proposal to increase the European decision making on their own security.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=949.0,982.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/36","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nEurope has a larger GNP and the population than the Soviet Union. Logically, it is a community that should be able to defend itself. The one problem that I see with your proposal, it has to do with nuclear weapons. One can understand that the Europeans taking control of their destiny in conventional weapons.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=982.0,1009.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/37","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\n\n\u003e\u003e That's all I'm proposing. We have to provide the nuclear element. I think the Europeans cannot build up, or they could, but if the Europeans try to build up nuclear forces to match the Soviet and we build up a separate nuclear position to match the Soviets. Then, of course, you would get into a huge armaments race.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=1009.0,1036.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/38","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nMy idea is twofold. One, there's really no reason why the Europeans should not take the principal burden for the conventional defense of Europe, especially if you consider that we are bearing the principle burden for the nuclear defense of the world. And are still going to contribute to the conventional defense of Europe.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=1036.0,1056.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/39","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nI'm not in favor of withdrawing all our troops from Europe. I would like to keep a significant portion there to make it clear that we will be heavily engaged in case of aggression. The second element of my view is that independent of the level of forces, the Europeans have slid into a very passive position.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=1056.0,1081.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/40","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nWe make all the proposals on strategy, on weapons systems and on negotiations with the Soviets. The Europeans play to their domestic audiences and give the impression, on the one hand, that they are resisting our pressures for their defense. And secondly, that they are more moderate and more thoughtful than we are, and they're bringing us to the negotiating table.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=1081.0,1107.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/41","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nAnd they can afford to do this only because they have no responsibility for the outcome. They are almost like a lobby in our decisions making process. And I would like to have them confront their own decisions. Take this whole debate about nuclear weapons in Europe. I've proposed that the Europeans take over the negotiations on weapons station on their territory.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=1107.0,1134.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/42","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nWhy? If they don't want them, they can get rid of them this way. We don't need those places for our defense. If they do want them then they have made the decision and they cannot make it an American-European issue.\n\u003e\u003e If they don't need them or if-\n\u003e\u003e I think they do need them.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=1134.0,1154.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/43","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\n\n\u003e\u003e Well, that's the point, isn't this the essential problem? In Europe there is a growing feeling that nuclear weapons on European territory are not in their interests.\n\u003e\u003e Sure, but the implication of that is that the nuclear war should be fought on American territory. And how can one ask the American people to sustain an alliance in which the partner says, we are not prepared to suffer the damage on our own territory that you are defending that we want to inflict on your territory.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=1154.0,1190.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/44","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nIt just is inconceivable. And the reason we should have nuclear weapons in Europe is to create an organic link in risk between Europe and the United States.\n\u003e\u003e What makes you, perhaps reasonably optimistic Europeans will defend themselves conventionally?\n\u003e\u003e Not optimistic. I'm just saying if they won't, they won't.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=1190.0,1215.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/45","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\n\n\u003e\u003e I mean, there's so much accusation now of the United States as the provocateur. Seeing us as on the same moral plane as the Soviets.\n\u003e\u003e That's absolutely right, and that is the problem in Europe. I'm saying one of two things. If the Europeans will not defend themselves with conventional weapons, then we can decide from case to case whether it a pressure on Europe is worth a nuclear war.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=1215.0,1247.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/46","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nThat's then a purely American decision. If they can be defended by nuclear weapons anyway then we might as well make our dispossessions on that basis. So it's really up to them. We have the option of defending them with nuclear weapons from here if we want to.\n\u003e\u003e In your talking to European leaders, do you find any kind of support for the type of proposals you wrote up in Time?\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=1247.0,1274.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/47","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\n\n\u003e\u003e No, for the very good reason that until an American government faces them with the prospect of either/or, either you build up your conventional weapons or there will be some consequences. They will not make that commitment because it will cost money. It will have domestic risk, a domestic price.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=1274.0,1299.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/48","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nBut, we will be forced to do it sooner or later because what we now have is a great wave of nuclear passivism in Europe. So if the European government said okay, we'll listen to your nuclear passivism if you people are willing to build up conventional forces. But we would find that the same people who demonstrate against nuclear weapons also will demonstrate against conventional weapons.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=1299.0,1328.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/49","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nThey don't want any weapons. If that is the case, then we have to redo, think the whole defense issue.\n\u003e\u003e Are we really talking more fundamentally not just about Atlantic policy, but a crisis of democratic leadership, democratic opinion?\n\u003e\u003e We are facing right now a unwillingness to face the facts of the period in which we're living in.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=1328.0,1350.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/50","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nAnd an enormous count in wishful thinking, in which anybody who can come up with a plausible theory can get adherence, but not every theory is equal. Some risks you can't run.\n\u003e\u003e It's fairly clear now in retrospect that if we'd been farsighted, we would've Europeanized NATO, let's say back in the mid 50s, once Europe had gotten back on its feet.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=1350.0,1380.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/51","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nAfter all, there really isn't much sense in our doing it.\n\u003e\u003e Historically Europe, the defense of Europe against Russia never involved the United States. I mean before 1939 it would never have occurred to any European to invoke the United States against Russia in the defense of Europe.\n\u003e\u003e Absolutely, but don't you think we might run the risk that if we really push the proposal of that sort now it might be perceived in some european quarters that we're kind of running out on them and that might sort of accelerate the pacifism movement over there.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=1380.0,1422.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/52","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\n\n\u003e\u003e Absolutely correct. That is a risk, that's why it has to be done with great delicacy. But it is also true that neutralism and passivism are growing in Europe even under present arrangements. And we have to balance it. The risk you mention is a real one. We have to balance it against the risk that the Europeans take the defence but the United States take so much for granted that they feel that they can conduct any policy they want under that umbrella.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=1422.0,1452.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/53","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\n\n\u003e\u003e That's very interesting but before we run out of time I'd like to shift the answers a little bit you were heading up to president's commission on Central America, there's a great deal of interest on that. I wonder whether you can tell as whether you're optimistic that that region might be stabilized.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=1452.0,1474.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/54","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\n\n\u003e\u003e In that commission report which was unanimous Something that would not be self evident from some of the journalistic accounts that I have read. We recommended a Economic Development Program. A negotiation program and a military program. The economic program would bring Central America back by 1990 to the level it had in 1978.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=1474.0,1506.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/55","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nWhich is a very minimum program, it would just get them back to where they were before the war, in a period of six years. The negotiating program says, all foreign military shipments should stop. All foreign advisors should be withdrawn, and the level of forces should be reduced 1979 levels.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=1506.0,1526.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/56","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nIn other words, let's make Central America again a Central American region. If all of that fails, then we favor a build up of the forces that are resisting the outside aggression. Now, am I optimistic? It depends on the congress. The great danger is supposing we put forward this program which is a minimum program of restoring Central America by 1990 to the level of 78 congress cuts it in half.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=1526.0,1558.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/57","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nWhat does that mean? That it take tell, it may mean we can achieve nothing. Or it may mean that it will take until 96 to get them there. Well, 96 is 12 years away. And that's not a very hopeful prospect. They have been cutting military aid year after year and we are under the scope another to backup.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=1558.0,1586.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/58","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nWith all the consequences this will have on surrounding countries including Mexico.\n\u003e\u003e So you're saying that if this program is to be effective it has to be taken in it's entirety and not piecemeal or apart?\n\u003e\u003e In it's substantial entirety idea, I'm not going to argue for every last dollar but without significant cuts you, absolutely.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=1586.0,1607.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/59","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\n\n\u003e\u003e Is there a danger in your mind? From your investigation that El Salvador could, for example, collapse any time without-\n\u003e\u003e I wouldn't say any time, but there's a danger that El Salvador could collapse, yes.\n\u003e\u003e Do you see your commission as a type of one of the major ways that a president could restore bipartisanship on, for example, a European issue?\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=1607.0,1628.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/60","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\n\n\u003e\u003e I think commission is a major way. I think very complicated foreign policy issues, require an active presidential leadership. And I think on the European issue it is possible to create a NATO Commission of the NATO countries, that states what the requirements are and what the objectives are.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=1628.0,1658.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/61","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\nBut finally, whether you Europeanized NATO or do not Europeanized NATO. That is not something that a commission can decide.\n\u003e\u003e I think we're just about out of time. I'd like to thank Dr. Kissinger, for joining us tonight. And I'd like to thank our panelists Dr. Joe Nogey of University of Houston, Dr. John Spaniard, University of Florida for being with us.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=1658.0,1681.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/62","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\n\n\u003e\u003e Thank you.\n\u003e\u003e This program was made possible by a grant from Exxon company USA.\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=1681.0,1690.0"},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7760/annotation/63","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"\n[MUSIC]\n\n","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=1690.0,1829.435"}]},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7761","type":"AnnotationPage","label":{"en":["ms_1981_s07_b0908_caption.vtt [Transcript]"]},"items":[{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7761/annotation/64","type":"Annotation","motivation":"transcribing","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"00:00:00.000 --\u003e 00:00:10.000\n[SOUND].\n\n00:01:23.722 --\u003e 00:01:30.496\nThe following program is made possible\nby a grant from Exxon company USA.\n\n00:01:30.496 --\u003e 00:01:33.160\nPublic Policy Forum is\nproduced by the Center For\n\n00:01:33.160 --\u003e 00:01:35.632\nPublic Policy at\nthe University of Houston.\n\n00:01:42.645 --\u003e 00:01:46.065\n\u003e\u003e Good evening, I'm Tom Mayor from\nthe University of Houston Center For\n\n00:01:46.065 --\u003e 00:01:47.500\nPublic Policy.\n\n00:01:47.500 --\u003e 00:01:52.410\nTonight's distinguished guest is former\nSecretary of State Henry A Kissinger.\n\n00:01:52.410 --\u003e 00:01:57.606\nOur panelists are Professors Joseph Nogy\nof the University of Houston and\n\n00:01:57.606 --\u003e 00:02:00.720\nJohn Spanier of the University of Florida.\n\n00:02:01.720 --\u003e 00:02:05.200\nThe topic tonight is\nAmerican foreign policy.\n\n00:02:06.298 --\u003e 00:02:10.245\nDr Kissinger,\ndetente seems to be dead, and\n\n00:02:10.245 --\u003e 00:02:15.480\nSoviet-American relations appear to\nhave deteriorated in recent years.\n\n00:02:15.480 --\u003e 00:02:22.927\nIs this undesirable, and if so,\nwhat should the United States be doing?\n\n00:02:22.927 --\u003e 00:02:26.990\n\u003e\u003e Well, I think that relations\nwith the Soviet Union are not good.\n\n00:02:26.990 --\u003e 00:02:27.580\nBut then,\n\n00:02:28.640 --\u003e 00:02:33.200\nit's hard to think of a period in which\nthey have been all that extraordinary.\n\n00:02:34.580 --\u003e 00:02:37.400\nPeople always say we're going\nback to the Cold War, but\n\n00:02:38.470 --\u003e 00:02:43.780\nif you look at any ten year period rather\nthan in any one or two year period,\n\n00:02:43.780 --\u003e 00:02:48.020\nin every ten year period there has\nbeen more or less the same cycle.\n\n00:02:49.380 --\u003e 00:02:55.210\nAnd I think right now\nthe Soviet Union is resisting\n\n00:02:55.210 --\u003e 00:02:59.430\na strengthening of NATO as they\ndid in the 50s and in the 60s.\n\n00:03:00.580 --\u003e 00:03:03.910\nAnd as they are doing now,\n\n00:03:03.910 --\u003e 00:03:09.220\nI think what we should do is more or\nless what the administration is doing.\n\n00:03:09.220 --\u003e 00:03:14.080\nShow a willingness to negotiate,\nindicate to the Soviets that the lines of\n\n00:03:14.080 --\u003e 00:03:19.920\ncommunication are open, establish\na complete program for our policy.\n\n00:03:19.920 --\u003e 00:03:26.220\nBut if we show any excessive eagerness, we\nwill merely be tempting Soviet pressures.\n\n00:03:26.220 --\u003e 00:03:31.580\n\u003e\u003e There have been some speculation\nin the press that rhetoric\n\n00:03:31.580 --\u003e 00:03:36.470\nseems to be important, such as the\nPresident's speech about the evil empire.\n\n00:03:36.470 --\u003e 00:03:42.620\n\u003e\u003e Yes, I've heard that statement\nvery often about the focus of evil.\n\n00:03:44.632 --\u003e 00:03:48.470\nI might if someone asked my opinion\nI might not have recommended\n\n00:03:48.470 --\u003e 00:03:50.430\nusing that particular phrase.\n\n00:03:50.430 --\u003e 00:03:54.740\nOn the other hand, to create\nthe impression that the Soviet leaders\n\n00:03:54.740 --\u003e 00:03:59.310\nare such sensitive flowers\nthat our president makes one\n\n00:03:59.310 --\u003e 00:04:04.290\nstatement to a very special audience\nconcerned with their problems.\n\n00:04:04.290 --\u003e 00:04:08.690\nAnd they are then insulted forever after,\nthat is just absurd.\n\n00:04:08.690 --\u003e 00:04:16.730\nI bet that if you put a researcher to work\non any one month set of issues of Prafta.\n\n00:04:16.730 --\u003e 00:04:20.000\nAnd took out what Soviet\npolit-bureau members are saying\n\n00:04:20.000 --\u003e 00:04:24.430\nin the normal course of events to their\nown public about the United States.\n\n00:04:24.430 --\u003e 00:04:30.010\nYou would find statements infinitely\ntougher than what President Reagan said.\n\n00:04:30.010 --\u003e 00:04:33.258\nAnd on top of it,\nyou'd find them repeated day after day, so\n\n00:04:33.258 --\u003e 00:04:37.900\nit may have been a slightly\ntoo muscular phraseology, but\n\n00:04:37.900 --\u003e 00:04:44.830\nthe Soviets have used it now to put us on\nthe defensive and to get us to apologize.\n\n00:04:44.830 --\u003e 00:04:48.033\nAnd that's the way they\nbegin every negotiation.\n\n00:04:48.033 --\u003e 00:04:53.915\n\u003e\u003e Dr. Kissinger, there's been a change of\nleadership in the Soviet Union recently.\n\n00:04:53.915 --\u003e 00:04:58.475\nAnd we hear talks about new beginnings and\nnew opportunities.\n\n00:04:58.475 --\u003e 00:05:01.202\nDoes it really matter very much who\n\n00:05:01.202 --\u003e 00:05:05.752\nconstitutes the leadership in the Soviet\nUnion in terms of US Soviet relations?\n\n00:05:05.752 --\u003e 00:05:08.982\n\u003e\u003e I think it is a great\nmistake to believe that a new\n\n00:05:08.982 --\u003e 00:05:11.522\nGeneral Secretary of\nthe Communist Party can come in.\n\n00:05:11.522 --\u003e 00:05:12.742\nThat's the key position.\n\n00:05:14.112 --\u003e 00:05:18.182\nAnd then announce that on basis of his own\npersonal conviction he can change their\n\n00:05:18.182 --\u003e 00:05:18.812\npolicies.\n\n00:05:21.052 --\u003e 00:05:24.070\nIt is a collection of bureaucracies.\n\n00:05:24.070 --\u003e 00:05:30.590\nAnd therefore, the personal views of\nany one man are not that incisive.\n\n00:05:31.762 --\u003e 00:05:36.230\nSecondly, Chenyenko, doesn't strike\nme as the strongest man in the world.\n\n00:05:36.230 --\u003e 00:05:39.910\nHe just lost a leadership struggle,\n15 months ago.\n\n00:05:39.910 --\u003e 00:05:44.700\nSo I think there is\nan opportunity to negotiate.\n\n00:05:44.700 --\u003e 00:05:46.230\nNot because Andropov died,\n\n00:05:46.230 --\u003e 00:05:50.730\nnot because there is, because\nChernenko will make a new beginning.\n\n00:05:50.730 --\u003e 00:05:54.180\nBut because the Soviet leaders are aging.\n\n00:05:54.180 --\u003e 00:05:59.970\nBecause they're reaching a, they are in\nan almost chronic succession crisis.\n\n00:05:59.970 --\u003e 00:06:01.700\nAnd because their economy is a mess.\n\n00:06:01.700 --\u003e 00:06:05.790\nAnd therefore I think they need\na period of respite just as they did\n\n00:06:05.790 --\u003e 00:06:07.029\nafter the death of Stalin.\n\n00:06:08.780 --\u003e 00:06:14.690\n\u003e\u003e Do you see any value in a summit\nmeeting this year some time?\n\n00:06:14.690 --\u003e 00:06:19.200\n\u003e\u003e I do not favor a summit\nmeeting unless there have\n\n00:06:19.200 --\u003e 00:06:21.420\nbeen negotiations that have gone very far.\n\n00:06:22.440 --\u003e 00:06:25.920\nAnd the president and\nthe Soviet leader can\n\n00:06:27.950 --\u003e 00:06:30.870\nthen do the concluding\nphase of the negotiation.\n\n00:06:30.870 --\u003e 00:06:33.490\nI think an unprepared summit meeting or\n\n00:06:33.490 --\u003e 00:06:37.250\na symbolic summit meeting\nwill give the Soviets.\n\n00:06:37.250 --\u003e 00:06:42.230\nIt will either backfire or it will give\nthe Soviets the idea that they can relieve\n\n00:06:42.230 --\u003e 00:06:46.070\ntension simply by atmospherics and\na year or so\n\n00:06:46.070 --\u003e 00:06:48.330\nafterwards we would be\nworse off than before.\n\n00:06:50.420 --\u003e 00:06:53.660\n\u003e\u003e Just one brief follow up.\n\n00:06:53.660 --\u003e 00:06:57.610\nDuring the period of the Nixon presidency,\nthere seemed\n\n00:06:57.610 --\u003e 00:07:01.630\nto be almost a tendency developed\ntoward institutionalized summitry.\n\n00:07:01.630 --\u003e 00:07:03.180\nThat is, on a regular basis.\n\n00:07:03.180 --\u003e 00:07:07.990\n\u003e\u003e We didn't have our first\nsummit until 1972, that was\n\n00:07:07.990 --\u003e 00:07:12.910\nfour years after Reagan or three and a\nhalf years after Nixon came in to office.\n\n00:07:14.190 --\u003e 00:07:18.600\nAt that time we had signed whole host of\nagreements that had been prepared for\n\n00:07:18.600 --\u003e 00:07:19.950\nan extended period of time.\n\n00:07:21.270 --\u003e 00:07:27.334\nOnce that has been accomplished, I think,\nthen indeed there were two more summits.\n\n00:07:28.490 --\u003e 00:07:34.620\nIn retrospect, I think, we then made\nthe mistake I believe, of trying to have\n\n00:07:34.620 --\u003e 00:07:38.590\nagreements at every summit and you can't\nprepare that many agreements that quickly.\n\n00:07:39.660 --\u003e 00:07:43.265\nI think once a different\nrelationship exists,\n\n00:07:43.265 --\u003e 00:07:48.942\nan occasional meeting of the president and\nthe Soviet general secretary,\n\n00:07:48.942 --\u003e 00:07:53.190\nsimply to review the situation\nwould have some merits.\n\n00:07:53.190 --\u003e 00:07:57.710\nBut in the present circumstances,\nI think it would be dangerous.\n\n00:07:59.020 --\u003e 00:08:02.180\n\u003e\u003e Let me switch it slightly\nto American politics.\n\n00:08:02.180 --\u003e 00:08:09.300\nYou've often talked about the problems\nof the conducting of foreign policy.\n\n00:08:09.300 --\u003e 00:08:13.840\nTo what extent do you think these problems\nresult from the very nature of our system?\n\n00:08:13.840 --\u003e 00:08:19.900\nThat is, for example, harking back\nto your earlier years in office,\n\n00:08:19.900 --\u003e 00:08:23.730\nDayton with the offering of incentives,\nparticularly economic incentives.\n\n00:08:23.730 --\u003e 00:08:28.280\nThe attempt to cut them off,\nto impose sanctions on the Soviets if they\n\n00:08:28.280 --\u003e 00:08:31.710\ndidn't behave themselves was\na degree of self-restraint.\n\n00:08:31.710 --\u003e 00:08:35.240\nIt's very difficult to do\nwhen the Senate can pass a.\n\n00:08:35.240 --\u003e 00:08:41.262\nWhen you have interest for\ntroops in this country like the prophet\n\n00:08:41.262 --\u003e 00:08:47.284\nthey like cool cash rather than\ncold war I was wondering if\n\n00:08:47.284 --\u003e 00:08:52.430\nprompts of our system and\nthe difficulties it posses for\n\n00:08:52.430 --\u003e 00:08:56.615\nthe steadiness that\nyour policies call for?\n\n00:09:00.596 --\u003e 00:09:02.725\n\u003e\u003e The policies that I favor and\n\n00:09:02.725 --\u003e 00:09:08.060\nindeed any meaningful foreign\npolicy requires steadiness.\n\n00:09:08.060 --\u003e 00:09:11.200\nYou have to be able to carry it out\nover an extended period of time.\n\n00:09:11.200 --\u003e 00:09:14.930\nBecause otherwise,\nneither your adversaries nor\n\n00:09:14.930 --\u003e 00:09:16.900\nyour friends know what you're going to do.\n\n00:09:16.900 --\u003e 00:09:19.880\nYou become an element of instability.\n\n00:09:19.880 --\u003e 00:09:25.940\nAnd you generate delays on the part\nof your adversaries, if not pressure,\n\n00:09:25.940 --\u003e 00:09:31.590\nand a sort of neutralism\non the part of your allies.\n\n00:09:31.590 --\u003e 00:09:37.220\nNow, the interesting question is to what\nextent is that inherent in our system or\n\n00:09:37.220 --\u003e 00:09:40.850\nto what extent has it been closed by\nthe catastrophes of the last decade.\n\n00:09:43.200 --\u003e 00:09:48.300\nI think much of it has been caused\nby the dislocations of Watergate and\n\n00:09:48.300 --\u003e 00:09:50.850\nto a lesser extent the Vietnam war.\n\n00:09:50.850 --\u003e 00:09:55.280\nWhich we can be executive authority and\nstrengthen the Congressional authority.\n\n00:09:56.330 --\u003e 00:10:02.732\nUnder present conditions it is very\ndifficult, because every Congressman,\n\n00:10:02.732 --\u003e 00:10:08.455\nin fact every journalist thinks he\ncan be his own Secretary of State and\n\n00:10:08.455 --\u003e 00:10:14.091\ngo off and And negotiate and\n\n00:10:14.091 --\u003e 00:10:19.615\nyes you have pressure groups,\nthere is another problem that our\n\n00:10:19.615 --\u003e 00:10:25.547\npresent system of selecting a President\ntends over a period of time to\n\n00:10:25.547 --\u003e 00:10:30.580\nproduce people who are not\noriented towards a substance.\n\n00:10:30.580 --\u003e 00:10:32.690\nThey are oriented toward\nspecial interest groups.\n\n00:10:34.770 --\u003e 00:10:42.400\nSo, we have a lot of internal\nchanges that need to be addressed.\n\n00:10:42.400 --\u003e 00:10:48.240\n\u003e\u003e Do you have any suggestions about,\nare there structural changes that\n\n00:10:48.240 --\u003e 00:10:53.368\nyou might recommend?\n\n00:10:53.368 --\u003e 00:10:58.142\n\u003e\u003e Well I think, well truthful I\nthink within the executive branch\n\n00:11:01.498 --\u003e 00:11:03.670\nOf course,\ndiffers from President to President.\n\n00:11:05.480 --\u003e 00:11:10.140\nI think under present circumstances,\nthere's perhaps so\n\n00:11:10.140 --\u003e 00:11:13.580\nmuch rivalry between\nthe various departments,\n\n00:11:14.780 --\u003e 00:11:20.009\nthat they consume an excessive amount of\ntheir time in bureaucratic maneuvering.\n\n00:11:21.010 --\u003e 00:11:24.320\n\u003e\u003e And I think it's somewhat\ngreater insistence and\n\n00:11:24.320 --\u003e 00:11:30.230\ncoherence would be necessary, as between\nthe Executive branch and the Congress.\n\n00:11:32.690 --\u003e 00:11:35.780\nI really don't have any\nvery brilliant ideas.\n\n00:11:35.780 --\u003e 00:11:41.750\nI think after the election, whoever is\nelected ought to make a major effort\n\n00:11:41.750 --\u003e 00:11:49.030\nto bring about a bipartisan foreign\npolicy by perhaps associating\n\n00:11:49.030 --\u003e 00:11:53.760\nsome of the leaders of the Congress in\nsome of his internal deliberations.\n\n00:11:53.760 --\u003e 00:12:00.210\nBut the problem is if they don't show\nrestraint, if they use the information\n\n00:12:00.210 --\u003e 00:12:04.790\nto conduct an even more Independent\npolicy the thing will backfire.\n\n00:12:06.520 --\u003e 00:12:10.960\nI once made the experiment when I was\nSecretary of State of showing our\n\n00:12:10.960 --\u003e 00:12:14.940\ncables to a group of Congressman\nconcerned with a particular issue.\n\n00:12:16.140 --\u003e 00:12:20.760\nThen started arguing with our replies and\n\n00:12:20.760 --\u003e 00:12:24.670\nthey got themselves into\nthe cable drafting business and\n\n00:12:24.670 --\u003e 00:12:30.300\nwe have to stop it after a few weeks,\nbut if this continues when you take and\n\n00:12:30.300 --\u003e 00:12:33.880\nwhatever you think of the wisdom\nof having american forces in Peru.\n\n00:12:33.880 --\u003e 00:12:39.060\nIt's for\nthe reason if you wanted to honorably\n\n00:12:39.060 --\u003e 00:12:39.960\n\u003e\u003e Some success,\n\n00:12:41.010 --\u003e 00:12:43.680\nwe had to be in a position where\nwe could bargain about it.\n\n00:12:43.680 --\u003e 00:12:48.150\nBut when the congress simultaneously\nvotes a resolution to take them out,\n\n00:12:48.150 --\u003e 00:12:52.290\nyou didn't have to be a genius on\nthe other side just to outweight us.\n\n00:12:52.290 --\u003e 00:12:56.610\n\u003e\u003e But given that, is it one thing\nto cough at bipartisanship, but\n\n00:12:56.610 --\u003e 00:13:01.360\nthe consensus is just dead.\n\n00:13:01.360 --\u003e 00:13:05.900\nAnd if you really look at\nthe the Democratic parties,\n\n00:13:05.900 --\u003e 00:13:10.990\nthe Republican parties have really\ndeeply conflicting opinions now about\n\n00:13:10.990 --\u003e 00:13:16.490\nthe nature of the conflict with\nthe Soviet Union, about the use of force.\n\n00:13:16.490 --\u003e 00:13:19.350\nThe Henry Jackson wing of\nthe party is dead, and\n\n00:13:19.350 --\u003e 00:13:21.320\nthe whole center of gravity\non the party is swung.\n\n00:13:22.380 --\u003e 00:13:24.260\n\u003e\u003e I'm extremely worried.\n\n00:13:24.260 --\u003e 00:13:31.350\nI saw that one of the democratic\ncandidates was accusing the other.\n\n00:13:31.350 --\u003e 00:13:33.460\n\u003e\u003e Yeah.\n\u003e\u003e That he was favoring the so-called\n\n00:13:33.460 --\u003e 00:13:37.800\nbuild down concept which\nrequires the destruction of two\n\n00:13:39.700 --\u003e 00:13:42.310\nnuclear weapons for every new one we build\n\u003e\u003e And\n\n00:13:42.310 --\u003e 00:13:46.490\nhe attacked the man on the ground that\nI would use, that we keep that up and\n\n00:13:46.490 --\u003e 00:13:48.500\npretty soon,\nwe won't have any weapons left.\n\n00:13:49.610 --\u003e 00:13:54.278\nBut on the ground that it was too tough,\nit permitted the building of new weapons.\n\n00:13:54.278 --\u003e 00:13:59.650\n\u003e\u003e [LAUGH]\n\u003e\u003e So, if you have a competition in\n\n00:14:00.810 --\u003e 00:14:02.830\n\u003e\u003e And who can be softer?\n\n00:14:03.890 --\u003e 00:14:05.690\nYou have a very real problem.\n\n00:14:05.690 --\u003e 00:14:08.870\nThere is no answer to that.\n\n00:14:08.870 --\u003e 00:14:12.870\nAll one can say in general is this,\neither we're gonna solve the problem\n\n00:14:12.870 --\u003e 00:14:16.920\nof bipartisanship or we're gonna\nsuffer one debacle after another\n\n00:14:16.920 --\u003e 00:14:21.120\nin foreign policy and\nthe American public won't stand for it.\n\n00:14:21.120 --\u003e 00:14:23.369\nAnd then, they will have to\nbe an electoral battle on it.\n\n00:14:25.310 --\u003e 00:14:27.650\nThis is not a losing people.\n\n00:14:27.650 --\u003e 00:14:33.590\n\u003e\u003e You think this is a principal\ndisadvantage we face against the Soviets.\n\n00:14:33.590 --\u003e 00:14:38.340\nTheir Foreign Minister for\nexample, Gromyko's been around for\n\n00:14:38.340 --\u003e 00:14:41.410\n30 years,\ncertainly lends some great stability.\n\n00:14:41.410 --\u003e 00:14:42.760\nIs that one of the principle problems?\n\n00:14:42.760 --\u003e 00:14:45.650\n\u003e\u003e Well, stability's good only\nif your politics is correct.\n\n00:14:45.650 --\u003e 00:14:46.150\n\u003e\u003e Yeah.\n\u003e\u003e [LAUGH]\n\n00:14:47.230 --\u003e 00:14:48.720\n\u003e\u003e I think one of the assets\n\n00:14:48.720 --\u003e 00:14:52.890\nthe Soviets have is that enormous\npersistance when confronting\n\n00:14:52.890 --\u003e 00:14:56.570\nthe eagerness to come to an agreement\nof a group of western countries.\n\n00:14:56.570 --\u003e 00:15:01.220\nBecause keeps repeating the same\nproposition week after week,\n\n00:15:01.220 --\u003e 00:15:02.050\nmonth after month.\n\n00:15:02.050 --\u003e 00:15:06.130\nThe western nations feel that there's\nsomething wrong with a deadlock that\n\n00:15:06.130 --\u003e 00:15:09.880\ncontinues forever and they're always or\nseemingly forever and\n\n00:15:09.880 --\u003e 00:15:15.660\nthey always pressure to\ncome up with a new idea and\n\n00:15:15.660 --\u003e 00:15:21.260\nthe Soviets in turn circle\nwatching this knowing\n\n00:15:21.260 --\u003e 00:15:25.720\nwe're gonna try to come up with new ideas\nhave an incentive to produce a dead lock.\n\n00:15:25.720 --\u003e 00:15:29.350\nSo we're achieving the opposite\nof what we want at the other end.\n\n00:15:30.350 --\u003e 00:15:34.550\nWith all our weaknesses I wouldn't\ntrade our system for theirs\n\n00:15:34.550 --\u003e 00:15:39.200\nhas been built in\nrigidities glamicos now 74.\n\n00:15:39.200 --\u003e 00:15:43.840\nIt has been in for\n30 years but when he dies\n\n00:15:45.820 --\u003e 00:15:49.930\nhas to be replaced because of the age.\n\n00:15:49.930 --\u003e 00:15:51.700\nWhat are they gonna do?\n\n00:15:51.700 --\u003e 00:15:53.940\nThat has been a one man show for 30 years.\n\n00:15:53.940 --\u003e 00:15:59.990\n\u003e\u003e I wonder if we might discuss your\n\n00:15:59.990 --\u003e 00:16:05.500\nrecent proposal for\nWhat we might call europeanizing NATO.\n\n00:16:06.660 --\u003e 00:16:12.230\nYou've long argued the central importance\nof NATO to American foreign policy and\n\n00:16:12.230 --\u003e 00:16:16.720\nyou've made a very significant\nproposal to increase\n\n00:16:16.720 --\u003e 00:16:21.629\nthe European decision making\non their own security.\n\n00:16:22.810 --\u003e 00:16:28.000\nEurope has a larger GNP and\nthe population than the Soviet Union.\n\n00:16:28.000 --\u003e 00:16:31.836\nLogically, it is a community that\nshould be able to defend itself.\n\n00:16:31.836 --\u003e 00:16:37.800\nThe one problem that I\nsee with your proposal,\n\n00:16:37.800 --\u003e 00:16:40.040\nit has to do with nuclear weapons.\n\n00:16:40.040 --\u003e 00:16:45.190\nOne can understand that the Europeans\n\n00:16:45.190 --\u003e 00:16:49.140\ntaking control of their destiny\nin conventional weapons.\n\n00:16:49.140 --\u003e 00:16:50.590\n\u003e\u003e That's all I'm proposing.\n\n00:16:50.590 --\u003e 00:16:54.710\nWe have to provide the nuclear element.\n\n00:16:54.710 --\u003e 00:16:58.140\nI think the Europeans cannot build up,\nor they could, but\n\n00:17:00.440 --\u003e 00:17:05.490\nif the Europeans try to build up\nnuclear forces to match the Soviet and\n\n00:17:05.490 --\u003e 00:17:10.050\nwe build up a separate nuclear\nposition to match the Soviets.\n\n00:17:10.050 --\u003e 00:17:15.560\nThen, of course,\nyou would get into a huge armaments race.\n\n00:17:16.590 --\u003e 00:17:17.630\nMy idea is twofold.\n\n00:17:17.630 --\u003e 00:17:22.680\nOne, there's really no reason why the\nEuropeans should not take the principal\n\n00:17:22.680 --\u003e 00:17:26.750\nburden for the conventional defense\nof Europe, especially if you consider\n\n00:17:26.750 --\u003e 00:17:30.960\nthat we are bearing the principle burden\nfor the nuclear defense of the world.\n\n00:17:30.960 --\u003e 00:17:34.340\nAnd are still going to contribute to\nthe conventional defense of Europe.\n\n00:17:36.680 --\u003e 00:17:39.270\nI'm not in favor of withdrawing\nall our troops from Europe.\n\n00:17:39.270 --\u003e 00:17:44.170\nI would like to keep a significant portion\nthere to make it clear that we will\n\n00:17:44.170 --\u003e 00:17:48.110\nbe heavily engaged in case of aggression.\n\n00:17:48.110 --\u003e 00:17:55.439\nThe second element of my view is that\nindependent of the level of forces,\n\n00:17:55.439 --\u003e 00:18:01.040\nthe Europeans have slid into\na very passive position.\n\n00:18:01.040 --\u003e 00:18:05.225\nWe make all the proposals on strategy,\non weapons systems and\n\n00:18:05.225 --\u003e 00:18:07.115\non negotiations with the Soviets.\n\n00:18:07.115 --\u003e 00:18:13.055\nThe Europeans play to their domestic\naudiences and give the impression,\n\n00:18:13.055 --\u003e 00:18:18.605\non the one hand, that they are resisting\nour pressures for their defense.\n\n00:18:18.605 --\u003e 00:18:23.642\nAnd secondly, that they are more moderate\nand more thoughtful than we are,\n\n00:18:23.642 --\u003e 00:18:27.710\nand they're bringing us\nto the negotiating table.\n\n00:18:27.710 --\u003e 00:18:31.410\nAnd they can afford to do this only\nbecause they have no responsibility for\n\n00:18:31.410 --\u003e 00:18:32.010\nthe outcome.\n\n00:18:34.360 --\u003e 00:18:39.480\nThey are almost like a lobby in\nour decisions making process.\n\n00:18:39.480 --\u003e 00:18:43.730\nAnd I would like to have them\nconfront their own decisions.\n\n00:18:43.730 --\u003e 00:18:47.079\nTake this whole debate about\nnuclear weapons in Europe.\n\n00:18:47.079 --\u003e 00:18:51.979\nI've proposed that the Europeans\ntake over the negotiations on\n\n00:18:51.979 --\u003e 00:18:54.890\nweapons station on their territory.\n\n00:18:54.890 --\u003e 00:18:55.980\nWhy?\n\n00:18:55.980 --\u003e 00:18:58.440\nIf they don't want them,\nthey can get rid of them this way.\n\n00:18:58.440 --\u003e 00:19:02.450\nWe don't need those places for\nour defense.\n\n00:19:02.450 --\u003e 00:19:05.170\nIf they do want them then they\nhave made the decision and\n\n00:19:05.170 --\u003e 00:19:08.427\nthey cannot make it\nan American-European issue.\n\n00:19:10.000 --\u003e 00:19:14.060\n\u003e\u003e If they don't need them or if-\n\u003e\u003e I think they do need them.\n\n00:19:14.060 --\u003e 00:19:18.005\n\u003e\u003e Well, that's the point,\nisn't this the essential problem?\n\n00:19:18.005 --\u003e 00:19:22.925\nIn Europe there is a growing feeling that\n\n00:19:22.925 --\u003e 00:19:27.405\nnuclear weapons on European territory\nare not in their interests.\n\n00:19:27.405 --\u003e 00:19:30.075\n\u003e\u003e Sure, but the implication of that is\n\n00:19:30.075 --\u003e 00:19:33.755\nthat the nuclear war should be\nfought on American territory.\n\n00:19:33.755 --\u003e 00:19:39.210\nAnd how can one ask the American\npeople to sustain an alliance\n\n00:19:39.210 --\u003e 00:19:44.380\nin which the partner says, we are not\nprepared to suffer the damage on\n\n00:19:44.380 --\u003e 00:19:50.210\nour own territory that you are defending\nthat we want to inflict on your territory.\n\n00:19:50.210 --\u003e 00:19:53.434\nIt just is inconceivable.\n\n00:19:53.434 --\u003e 00:19:58.000\nAnd the reason we should have nuclear\nweapons in Europe is to create\n\n00:19:58.000 --\u003e 00:20:03.050\nan organic link in risk between Europe and\nthe United States.\n\n00:20:03.050 --\u003e 00:20:07.808\n\u003e\u003e What makes you,\nperhaps reasonably optimistic Europeans\n\n00:20:07.808 --\u003e 00:20:11.760\nwill defend themselves conventionally?\n\n00:20:11.760 --\u003e 00:20:13.380\n\u003e\u003e Not optimistic.\n\n00:20:13.380 --\u003e 00:20:15.672\nI'm just saying if they won't, they won't.\n\n00:20:15.672 --\u003e 00:20:22.250\n\u003e\u003e I mean, there's so much accusation now\nof the United States as the provocateur.\n\n00:20:23.430 --\u003e 00:20:28.140\nSeeing us as on the same\nmoral plane as the Soviets.\n\n00:20:28.140 --\u003e 00:20:32.070\n\u003e\u003e That's absolutely right, and\nthat is the problem in Europe.\n\n00:20:33.090 --\u003e 00:20:34.620\nI'm saying one of two things.\n\n00:20:34.620 --\u003e 00:20:39.260\nIf the Europeans will not defend\nthemselves with conventional weapons,\n\n00:20:39.260 --\u003e 00:20:43.670\nthen we can decide from\ncase to case whether it\n\n00:20:43.670 --\u003e 00:20:46.185\na pressure on Europe is\nworth a nuclear war.\n\n00:20:47.220 --\u003e 00:20:49.090\nThat's then a purely American decision.\n\n00:20:50.090 --\u003e 00:20:52.930\nIf they can be defended\nby nuclear weapons anyway\n\n00:20:53.980 --\u003e 00:20:56.890\nthen we might as well make our\ndispossessions on that basis.\n\n00:20:58.170 --\u003e 00:20:59.610\nSo it's really up to them.\n\n00:21:01.630 --\u003e 00:21:05.660\nWe have the option of defending them with\nnuclear weapons from here if we want to.\n\n00:21:06.830 --\u003e 00:21:11.911\n\u003e\u003e In your talking to European leaders,\ndo you find any kind of support for\n\n00:21:11.911 --\u003e 00:21:14.974\nthe type of proposals\nyou wrote up in Time?\n\n00:21:14.974 --\u003e 00:21:20.249\n\u003e\u003e No, for the very good reason\nthat until an American government\n\n00:21:20.249 --\u003e 00:21:25.624\nfaces them with the prospect of either/or,\neither you build up\n\n00:21:25.624 --\u003e 00:21:31.640\nyour conventional weapons or\nthere will be some consequences.\n\n00:21:31.640 --\u003e 00:21:35.550\nThey will not make that commitment\nbecause it will cost money.\n\n00:21:35.550 --\u003e 00:21:39.919\nIt will have domestic risk,\na domestic price.\n\n00:21:39.919 --\u003e 00:21:44.030\nBut, we will be forced to do it sooner or\n\n00:21:44.030 --\u003e 00:21:52.140\nlater because what we now have is a great\nwave of nuclear passivism in Europe.\n\n00:21:53.620 --\u003e 00:21:58.980\nSo if the European government said okay,\nwe'll listen to your nuclear passivism if\n\n00:21:58.980 --\u003e 00:22:01.820\nyou people are willing to\nbuild up conventional forces.\n\n00:22:01.820 --\u003e 00:22:05.700\nBut we would find that the same people who\ndemonstrate against nuclear weapons also\n\n00:22:05.700 --\u003e 00:22:08.900\nwill demonstrate against\nconventional weapons.\n\n00:22:08.900 --\u003e 00:22:10.940\nThey don't want any weapons.\n\n00:22:10.940 --\u003e 00:22:15.820\nIf that is the case, then we have to redo,\nthink the whole defense issue.\n\n00:22:15.820 --\u003e 00:22:19.595\n\u003e\u003e Are we really talking more\nfundamentally not just about Atlantic\n\n00:22:19.595 --\u003e 00:22:23.792\npolicy, but a crisis of democratic\nleadership, democratic opinion?\n\n00:22:23.792 --\u003e 00:22:26.458\n\u003e\u003e We are facing right now a unwillingness\n\n00:22:26.458 --\u003e 00:22:30.660\nto face the facts of the period\nin which we're living in.\n\n00:22:30.660 --\u003e 00:22:35.860\nAnd an enormous count in wishful thinking,\nin which anybody who can come\n\n00:22:35.860 --\u003e 00:22:43.022\nup with a plausible theory can get\nadherence, but not every theory is equal.\n\n00:22:43.022 --\u003e 00:22:46.190\nSome risks you can't run.\n\n00:22:46.190 --\u003e 00:22:52.110\n\u003e\u003e It's fairly clear now in retrospect\nthat if we'd been farsighted,\n\n00:22:52.110 --\u003e 00:22:55.110\nwe would've Europeanized NATO,\n\n00:22:55.110 --\u003e 00:23:00.210\nlet's say back in the mid 50s,\nonce Europe had gotten back on its feet.\n\n00:23:00.210 --\u003e 00:23:05.030\nAfter all, there really isn't\nmuch sense in our doing it.\n\n00:23:05.030 --\u003e 00:23:08.989\n\u003e\u003e Historically Europe,\nthe defense of Europe\n\n00:23:08.989 --\u003e 00:23:13.479\nagainst Russia never\ninvolved the United States.\n\n00:23:13.479 --\u003e 00:23:19.197\nI mean before 1939 it would never\nhave occurred to any European\n\n00:23:19.197 --\u003e 00:23:25.134\nto invoke the United States against\nRussia in the defense of Europe.\n\n00:23:25.134 --\u003e 00:23:29.976\n\u003e\u003e Absolutely, but don't you think we\nmight run the risk that if we really\n\n00:23:29.976 --\u003e 00:23:34.819\npush the proposal of that sort now it\nmight be perceived in some european\n\n00:23:34.819 --\u003e 00:23:38.289\nquarters that we're kind\nof running out on them and\n\n00:23:38.289 --\u003e 00:23:42.760\nthat might sort of accelerate\nthe pacifism movement over there.\n\n00:23:42.760 --\u003e 00:23:43.800\n\u003e\u003e Absolutely correct.\n\n00:23:43.800 --\u003e 00:23:46.830\nThat is a risk, that's why it has\nto be done with great delicacy.\n\n00:23:47.960 --\u003e 00:23:50.040\nBut it is also true that neutralism and\n\n00:23:50.040 --\u003e 00:23:52.980\npassivism are growing in Europe\neven under present arrangements.\n\n00:23:54.250 --\u003e 00:23:56.080\nAnd we have to balance it.\n\n00:23:56.080 --\u003e 00:23:58.550\nThe risk you mention is a real one.\n\n00:23:58.550 --\u003e 00:24:03.130\nWe have to balance it against the risk\nthat the Europeans take the defence but\n\n00:24:03.130 --\u003e 00:24:05.840\nthe United States take so much for granted\n\n00:24:05.840 --\u003e 00:24:09.770\nthat they feel that they can conduct any\npolicy they want under that umbrella.\n\n00:24:12.110 --\u003e 00:24:16.611\n\u003e\u003e That's very interesting but before\nwe run out of time I'd like to shift\n\n00:24:16.611 --\u003e 00:24:21.263\nthe answers a little bit you were\nheading up to president's commission on\n\n00:24:21.263 --\u003e 00:24:25.183\nCentral America,\nthere's a great deal of interest on that.\n\n00:24:25.183 --\u003e 00:24:29.765\nI wonder whether you can tell as\nwhether you're optimistic that that\n\n00:24:29.765 --\u003e 00:24:31.740\nregion might be stabilized.\n\n00:24:34.390 --\u003e 00:24:39.755\n\u003e\u003e In that commission report which\nwas unanimous Something that would\n\n00:24:39.755 --\u003e 00:24:45.790\nnot be self evident from some of the\njournalistic accounts that I have read.\n\n00:24:45.790 --\u003e 00:24:53.282\nWe recommended\na Economic Development Program.\n\n00:24:53.282 --\u003e 00:24:55.820\nA negotiation program and\na military program.\n\n00:24:57.790 --\u003e 00:25:02.570\nThe economic program would bring\nCentral America back by 1990 to\n\n00:25:03.630 --\u003e 00:25:06.080\nthe level it had in 1978.\n\n00:25:06.080 --\u003e 00:25:10.190\nWhich is a very minimum program,\nit would just get\n\n00:25:10.190 --\u003e 00:25:15.160\nthem back to where they were before\nthe war, in a period of six years.\n\n00:25:15.160 --\u003e 00:25:20.390\nThe negotiating program says, all\nforeign military shipments should stop.\n\n00:25:20.390 --\u003e 00:25:23.260\nAll foreign advisors should be withdrawn,\nand\n\n00:25:23.260 --\u003e 00:25:26.310\nthe level of forces should\nbe reduced 1979 levels.\n\n00:25:26.310 --\u003e 00:25:31.530\nIn other words, let's make Central America\nagain a Central American region.\n\n00:25:31.530 --\u003e 00:25:36.294\nIf all of that fails,\nthen we favor a build up of\n\n00:25:36.294 --\u003e 00:25:42.053\nthe forces that are resisting\nthe outside aggression.\n\n00:25:42.053 --\u003e 00:25:43.440\nNow, am I optimistic?\n\n00:25:43.440 --\u003e 00:25:44.560\nIt depends on the congress.\n\n00:25:44.560 --\u003e 00:25:49.301\nThe great danger is supposing\nwe put forward this program\n\n00:25:49.301 --\u003e 00:25:53.944\nwhich is a minimum program\nof restoring Central America\n\n00:25:53.944 --\u003e 00:25:58.699\nby 1990 to the level of 78\ncongress cuts it in half.\n\n00:25:58.699 --\u003e 00:26:00.040\nWhat does that mean?\n\n00:26:00.040 --\u003e 00:26:03.180\nThat it take tell,\nit may mean we can achieve nothing.\n\n00:26:04.530 --\u003e 00:26:10.310\nOr it may mean that it will take\nuntil 96 to get them there.\n\n00:26:10.310 --\u003e 00:26:12.260\nWell, 96 is 12 years away.\n\n00:26:13.370 --\u003e 00:26:17.779\nAnd that's not a very hopeful prospect.\n\n00:26:17.779 --\u003e 00:26:22.518\nThey have been cutting military\naid year after year and\n\n00:26:22.518 --\u003e 00:26:26.140\nwe are under the scope another to backup.\n\n00:26:26.140 --\u003e 00:26:30.350\nWith all the consequences this will have\non surrounding countries including Mexico.\n\n00:26:31.670 --\u003e 00:26:35.558\n\u003e\u003e So you're saying that if this program\nis to be effective it has to be taken\n\n00:26:35.558 --\u003e 00:26:38.069\nin it's entirety and\nnot piecemeal or apart?\n\n00:26:38.069 --\u003e 00:26:42.345\n\u003e\u003e In it's substantial entirety idea,\nI'm not going to argue for\n\n00:26:42.345 --\u003e 00:26:47.520\nevery last dollar but\nwithout significant cuts you, absolutely.\n\n00:26:47.520 --\u003e 00:26:49.750\n\u003e\u003e Is there a danger in your mind?\n\n00:26:49.750 --\u003e 00:26:53.275\nFrom your investigation\nthat El Salvador could, for\n\n00:26:53.275 --\u003e 00:26:57.622\nexample, collapse any time without-\n\u003e\u003e I wouldn't say any time, but\n\n00:26:57.622 --\u003e 00:27:01.060\nthere's a danger that\nEl Salvador could collapse, yes.\n\n00:27:01.060 --\u003e 00:27:04.733\n\u003e\u003e Do you see your commission as a type\nof one of the major ways that a president\n\n00:27:04.733 --\u003e 00:27:08.182\ncould restore bipartisanship on,\nfor example, a European issue?\n\n00:27:08.182 --\u003e 00:27:12.500\n\u003e\u003e I think commission is a major way.\n\n00:27:12.500 --\u003e 00:27:17.775\nI think very complicated\nforeign policy issues,\n\n00:27:17.775 --\u003e 00:27:23.430\nrequire an active presidential leadership.\n\n00:27:23.430 --\u003e 00:27:25.950\nAnd I think on the European issue\n\n00:27:28.680 --\u003e 00:27:35.090\nit is possible to create\na NATO Commission of the NATO countries,\n\n00:27:35.090 --\u003e 00:27:38.640\nthat states what the requirements are and\nwhat the objectives are.\n\n00:27:38.640 --\u003e 00:27:44.120\nBut finally, whether you Europeanized NATO\nor do not Europeanized NATO.\n\n00:27:44.120 --\u003e 00:27:46.290\nThat is not something that\na commission can decide.\n\n00:27:48.190 --\u003e 00:27:50.280\n\u003e\u003e I think we're just about out of time.\n\n00:27:50.280 --\u003e 00:27:54.099\nI'd like to thank Dr.\nKissinger, for joining us tonight.\n\n00:27:54.099 --\u003e 00:27:58.689\nAnd I'd like to thank our panelists Dr.\nJoe Nogey of University of Houston, Dr.\n\n00:27:58.689 --\u003e 00:28:01.960\nJohn Spaniard, University of Florida for\nbeing with us.\n\n00:28:01.960 --\u003e 00:28:02.460\n\u003e\u003e Thank you.\n\n00:28:04.610 --\u003e 00:28:10.474\n\u003e\u003e This program was made possible\nby a grant from Exxon company USA.\n\n00:28:10.474 --\u003e 00:28:20.474\n[MUSIC]","format":"text/plain"},"target":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923#t=0.0,1829.435"}]},{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7761","type":"AnnotationPage","label":{"en":["English [Transcript]"]},"items":[{"id":"https://yalemssa.aviaryplatform.com/collections/56/collection_resources/17470/file/72923/transcript/7761/annotation/65","type":"Annotation","motivation":"subtitling","body":{"type":"TextualBody","value":"https://d9jk7wjtjpu5g.cloudfront.net/file_transcripts/associated_files/000/007/761/original/transcript_index_158290344020200228-764-1kpbrzw?1582885441","format":"text/vtt","language":"en"},"target":"https://d9jk7wjtjpu5g.cloudfront.net/file_transcripts/associated_files/000/007/761/original/transcript_index_158290344020200228-764-1kpbrzw?1582885441"}]}]}]}