Ask the Scholar

{
    "localId": "118568412",
    "label": "JGR/Fact Sheets",
    "core": "doc",
    "dtoType": "document",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/118568412"
}

{
    "id": "118568412",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/118568412",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "JGR/Fact Sheets",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/118568412",
    "identifierLocal": "485",
    "collections": [
        "Records of the Office of Counsel to the President (Reagan Administration)",
        "John Roberts' Subject Files"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/reagan/6908381/40-485-6908381-025-003-2017.pdf",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/reagan/6908381/40-485-6908381-025-003-2017.pdf",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/reagan/6908381/40-485-6908381-025-003-2017.pdf",
    "imageCount": 1,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

{
    "url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/118568412",
    "naId": 118568412,
    "coverageEndDate": {
        "logicalDate": "1986-12-31",
        "year": 1986
    },
    "coverageStartDate": {
        "logicalDate": "1982-01-01",
        "year": 1982
    },
    "levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
    "recordType": "description",
    "ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}

{
    "seq": 1,
    "pageIndex": 0,
    "type": "document",
    "url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/reagan/6908381/40-485-6908381-025-003-2017.pdf",
    "mediaId": "6d3fd99fdfb18721",
    "ocrText": "Ronald Reagan Presidential Library\nDigital Library Collections\nThis is a PDF of a folder from our textual collections.\nCollection: Roberts, John G.: Files\nFolder Title: JGR/Fact Sheets\nBox: 25\nTo see more digitized collections visit:\nhttps://reaganlibrary.gov/archives/digital-library\nTo see all Ronald Reagan Presidential Library inventories visit:\nhttps://reaganlibrary.gov/document-collection\nContact a reference archivist at: [email protected]\nCitation Guidelines: https://reaganlibrary.gov/citing\nNational Archives Catalogue: https://catalog.archives.gov/\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nJune 27, 1983\nFOR:\nFRED F. FIELDING\nFROM:\nJOHN G. ROBERTS, JR.\nSUBJECT:\nFact Sheet re: President's Commission\non Industrial Competitiveness\nRichard Darman has asked for comments by close of business on the\nabove-referenced fact sheet, to accompany the signing of the\nexecutive order creating the President's Commission on Industrial\nCompetitiveness. That signing is to take place tomorrow. The\nfact sheet differs from the last version of the executive order I\nsaw (and cleared) in two respects:\nthe fact sheet states that the Commission shall consist\nof not more than 25 members, while the executive order\nsets a ceiling of 15 members;\nthe fact sheet indicates labor representatives will\nserve on the Commission, while the executive order\nstates: \"Members appointed from the private sector\nshall represent elements of industry and commerce\nmost affected by high technology, or academic insti-\ntutions prominent in the field of high technology.\"\nI reviewed these discrepancies with Wendell Gunn. He advised\nthat the number in the executive order had been changed. He\nnoted that the decision to add labor representatives had been\nmade after approval of the executive order, and advised that they\nplanned to appoint a former general counsel of the UAW and the\ncurrent President of the Communications Workers Union. I think\nthe executive order should be revised to provide for members\nrepresenting labor, consistent with our objective of ensuring\nthat the private members not be considered government employees.\nI reviewed this proposed change with Ralph Tarr, who cleared the\noriginal executive order for Justice, and obtained his approval.\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nJune 27, 1983\nMEMORANDUM FOR RICHARD G. DARMAN\nASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT AND\nDEPUTY TO THE CHIEF OF STAFF\nFROM:\nFRED F. FIELDING FFF/RAH\nCOUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT\nSUBJECT:\nFact Sheet re: President's Commission on\nIndustrial Competitiveness\nCounsel's Office has reviewed the above-referenced fact sheet.\nIn light of the decision, reflected in the fact sheet, to appoint\nlabor representatives to this Commission, it is necessary to\nrevise the proposed executive order.\nThe last sentence of section 1 (a) of the executive order\ncurrently reads: \"Members appointed from the private sector\nshall represent elements of industry and commerce most affected\nby high technology, or academic institutions prominent in the\nfield of high technology.\" This should be changed to read:\n\"Members appointed from the private sector shall represent\nelements of industry, commerce, and labor most affected by high\ntechnology, or academic institutions prominent in the field of\nhigh technology.\" This proposed change has been approved by the\nDepartment of Justice.\nI would also note that the last version of the executive order\ncleared by Counsel's Office specified a membership of no more\nthan 15 people, while the fact sheet lists a membership ceiling\nof 25.\nFFFielding\nJGRoberts\nSubj.\nChron.\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nJune 27, 1983\nMEMORANDUM FOR RICHARD G. DARMAN\nASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT AND\nDEPUTY TO THE CHIEF OF STAFF\nFROM:\nFRED F. FIELDING\nCOUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT\nSUBJECT:\nFact Sheet re: President's Commission on\nIndustrial Competitiveness\nCounsel's Office has reviewed the above-referenced fact sheet.\nIn light of the decision, reflected in the fact sheet, to appoint\nlabor representatives to this Commission, it is necessary to\nrevise the proposed executive order.\nThe last sentence of section 1 (a) of the executive order\ncurrently reads: \"Members appointed from the private sector\nshall represent elements of industry and commerce most affected\nby high technology, or academic institutions prominent in the\nfield of high technology.\" This should be changed to read:\n\"Members appointed from the private sector shall represent\nelements of industry, commerce, and labor most affected by high\ntechnology, or academic institutions prominent in the field of\nhigh technology.\" This proposed change has been approved by the\nDepartment of Justice.\nI would also note that the last version of the executive order\ncleared by Counsel's Office specified a membership of no more\nthan 15 people, while the fact sheet lists a membership ceiling\nof 25.\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nAugust 12, 1983\nMEMORANDUM FOR FRED F. FIELDING\nFROM:\nJOHN G. ROBERTS\nSUBJECT:\nFact Sheet: Federal Initiatives\nin the Southwest Border Region\nRichard Darman has asked for comments by 6:00 p.m. tonight\non the above-referenced fact sheet. The fact sheet, to be\nreleased tomorrow in El Paso, summarizes the Cabinet's\ndecision with respect to the report of the Southwestern\nBorder States Working Group. It notes that the Vice\nPresident will chair an interagency \"action group\" with\nrepresentatives from various departments. The interagency\ngroup will implement the recommendations of the working\ngroup, primarily designed to increase the flow of federal\naid to the area. The fact sheet also announces\nestablishment of a \"project team\" to serve as contact point\nfor government and business leaders from the region.\nFinally, the fact sheet reviews the economic distress in the\nregion, caused by the recent peso devaluations.\nThe decision having been made to funnel aid to the region, I\nhave no legal objection to the fact sheet. The fact sheet\nreally does not say much of substance, other than that the\nVice President will oversee the effort.\nAttachment\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nAugust 12, 1983\nMEMORANDUM FOR RICHARD G. DARMAN\nASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT\nFROM:\nFRED F. FIELDING FFF/RAH\nCOUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT\nSUBJECT:\nFact Sheet: Federal Initiatives\nin the Southwest Border Region\nCounsel's Office has reviewed the above-referenced fact\nsheet, and finds no objection to it from a legal\nperspective.\nFFF: JGR:aw 8/12/83\nCC: FFFielding\nJGRoberts\nSubj.\nChron\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nAugust 12, 1983\nMEMORANDUM FOR RICHARD G. DARMAN\nASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT\nFROM:\nFRED F. FIELDING\nCOUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT\nSUBJECT:\nFact Sheet: Federal Initiatives\nin the Southwest Border Region\nCounsel's Office has reviewed the above-referenced fact\nsheet, and finds no objection to it from a legal\nperspective.\nFFF:JGR:aw 8/12/83\nCC: FFFielding\nJGRoberts\nSubj.\nChron\nID #.\nCU\nWHITE HOUSE\nCORRESPONDENCE TRACKING WORKSHEET\n0 OUTGOING\nH . INTERNAL\nI - INCOMING\nDate Correspondence\nReceived (YY/MM/DD)\n/\n/\nName of Correspondent: Richard G. DARMAN\nMI Mail Report\nUser Codes: (A)\n(B)\n(C)\nSubject:\nFact Sheet Federal Initiatives in the\nSouthwest Border Region\nROUTE TO:\nACTION\nDISPOSITION\nTracking\nType\nCompletion\nAction\nDate\nof\nDate\nOffice/Agency (Staff Name)\nCode\nYY/MM/DD\nResponse\nCode\nYY/MM/DD\nCUHOLL\nORIGINATOR 83,08,12\n/\n/\nReferral Note:\nWATIB\nI 83,08,12\n5 83,08,12\nReferral Note:\n6:00pm pm\n/\n/\n/ /\nReferral Note:\n/ /\n/\n/\nI\nReferral Note:\n/ /\n1 1\nReferral Note:\nACTION CODES:\nDISPOSITION CODES:\nA - Appropriate Action\nI Info Copy Only/No Action Necessary\nA * Answered\nC Completed\nC Comment/Recommendation\nR Direct Reply w/Gopy\nB - - Non-Special Referral\nS Suspended\nD Draft Response\nS For Signature\nF - Furnish Fact Sheet\nX Interim Reply\nto be used as Enclosure\nFOR OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE:\nType of Response = Initials of Signer\nCode = \"A\"\nCompletion Date = Date of Outgoing\nComments:\nKeep this worksheet attached to the original incoming letter.\nSend all routing updates to Central Reference (Room 75, OEOB).\nAlways return completed correspondence record to Central Files.\nRefer questions about the correspondence tracking system to Central Reference, ext. 2590.\n5/81\nDocument No. 073564CS\nis\nWHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORANDUM\n\"\nDATE: 8/12/83\nACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BY: 6:00 P.M. TONIGHT\nSUBJECT: FACT SHEET: FEDERAL INITIATIVES IN THE SOUTHWEST BORDER REGION\nACTION FYI\nACTION FYI\nVICE PRESIDENT\nHARPER\nMEESE\nHERRINGTON\nBAKER\nJENKINS\nDEAVER\nMcMANUS\nSTOCKMAN\nMURPHY\nCLARK\nROGERS\nDARMAN\nP\n65\nROLLINS\nDUBERSTEIN\nVERSTANDIG\nFELDSTEIN\nWHITTLESEY\nFIELDING\nBRADY/SPEAKES\nFULLER\nGERGEN\nREMARKS:\nMay we have your comments on the attached draft fact sheet no later\nthan 6:00 p.m. tonight. The fact sheet is scheduled for release\ntomorrow in El Paso, Texas.\nRESPONSE:\n12\nRichard G. Darman\nAssistant to the President\nDRAFT\nFACT SHEET\nFEDERAL INITIATIVES IN THE SOUTHWEST BORDER REGION\nThe President has asked the Vice President to oversee the\nestablishment of an interagency action group to implement\nrecommendations of the Southwestern Border States Working\nGroup. Representatives of federal agencies with programs\nserving the border region will participate on the interagency\nworking group. It will include the Secretaries of the Depart-\nments of Defense, Commerce, Labor, Health and Human Services,\nTransportation, Housing and Urban Development, Agriculture\nand Education.\nThe interagency group's primary objectives are: 1) to help\nstimulate job creation in the border region; and 2) to promote\neconomic diversification in those border areas hardest hit\nby last year's peso devaluations. The President has determined\nthat federal action should be rapid, as well as responsive\nto state and local judgments about the kinds of assistance\nthat would work best. He has instructed the new group to\nexpedite consideration of action proposals from the border\ncommunities and to increase the flow of financial and other\nresources into the region.\nA project team composed of répresentatives from each department\nwill serve as a federal contact point for border regional\ngovernments and businesses, promote multi-state cooperation,\nand conduct meetings with state officials to sharpen under-\nstanding of how each level of government intends to address\nborder problems.\nLast year's peso devaluations have hurt the entire border\nregion. These cities and towns hardest hit tend to be on\nor near the border, and heavily dependent on sales to\nMexican shoppers for jobs, income and tax revenues. In\nthese localities, waves of store closures have raised\nunemployment levels that already were high. In addition,\nfalling sales tax revenues have strained local government\nfinances at precisely the moment when economic difficulties\nhave increased demands for public services.\n-- Last September, after the most devastating of\nlast year's peso devaluations, store closures in\nBrownsville were up 80% over the previous September.\nIn McAllen, the increase was 27%; in Laredo, 42%.\n02\n--\nThis May unemployment in Cameron County was 16.1%;\nin Hidalgo, 17.8%; and in Webb County, 27.2%. In\nSanta Cruz County, Arizona, May unemployment was 21.2%;\nand in California's Imperial County, 34.7%.\n-- For the first five months of 1983, sales tax receipts\nin Brownsville were off 44% relative to the same period\nin 1983. In McAllen, sales tax receipts were off 41%;\nand in Laredo, 51%.\nThe Administration's overall economic policies have put the\nnation's economy on a path of strong and steady recovery.\nBringing the benefit of this recovery to the border region,\nhowever, will require a special effort by the federal government\nin cooperation with the four border states.\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nMarch 15, 1985\nMEMORANDUM FOR ROBERT KIMMITT\nDEPUTY ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT\nFOR NATIONAL SECURITY AFFAIRS\nFROM:\nASSOCIATE COUNSEL QZR TO THE PRESIDENT\nJOHN G. ROBERTS\nSUBJECT:\nJoint Summary and Fact Sheets\nfor President's Trip to Canada\nCounsel's Office has reviewed the above-referenced materials,\nand offers the following suggestions:\n1. The penultimate paragraph on the summary page is\nnot a sentence; something appears to be missing. Perhaps\nadd \"were discussed\" at the end.\n2. On page 2 of the Declaration Regarding Trade in\nGoods and Services, last paragraph, \"requirement\" should be\n\"requirements.\" \" On page 4, as the second item is written it\nsuggests we want to protect trade in counterfeit goods and\nother abuses of copyright and patent law. This could be\ncorrected by changing \"including\" to \"from.\"\n3. In the second bullet item on the Legal Assistance\nTreaty Fact Sheet, \"regulations\" should be \"relations.\"\ncc: David L. Chew\nADMINISTRATIVELY SENSITIVE - not to be released\nwithout authority of the Counsel to the President\nID #.\nCU\nWHITE HOUSE\nCORRESPONDENCE TRACKING WORKSHEET\n0 - OUTGOING\nH . INTERNAL\nI - INCOMING\nDate Correspondence\nReceived (YY/MM/DD)\n/\n/\nName of Correspondent: Dave Chew\nMI Mail Report\nUser Codes: (A)\n(B)\n(C)\nSubject:\nJoint summary and sact sheets for\nPresident's trip to Canada\nROUTE TO:\nACTION\nDISPOSITION\nTracking\nType\nCompletion\nAction\nDate\nof\nDate\nOffice/Agency\n(Staff Name)\nCode\nYY/MM/DD\nResponse\nCode\nYY/MM/DD\nCUITOLL\nORIGINATOR\n85/03/15\n/\n/\nReferral Note:\nCUAT 18\nR\n85,03,15\n5 85,03,15\n12N\nReferral Note:\n/\n/\n/\n/\nReferral Note:\n/\n/\n/\n/\nReferral Note:\n/\n/\n/\n/\nReferral Note:\nACTION CODES:\nDISPOSITION CODES:\nA * Appropriate Action\n1. Info Copy Only/No Action Necessary\nA Answered\nC Completed\nC - Comment/Recommendation\nR Direct Reply w/Copy\nB . Non-Special Referral\nS Suspended\nD Draft Response\nS For Signature\nF Furnish Fact Sheet\nX - Interim Reply\nto be used as Enclosure\nFOR OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE:\nType of Response = Initials of Signer\nCode = \"A\"\nADMINISTRATIVELY SENSITIVE - not to be released\nCompletion Date = Date of Outgoing\nComments:\nwithout authority of the Counsel to the President\nKeep this worksheet attached to the original incoming letter.\nSend all routing updates to Central Reference (Room 75, OEOB).\nAlways return completed correspondence record to Central Files.\nRefer questions about the correspondence tracking system to Central Reference, ext. 2590.\n5/81\nEXTREME CLOSE HOLD\nDocument No.\nWHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORANDUM\n3/15/85\nDATE:\nACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BY:\nNOON TODAY, 3/15\nJOINT SUMMARY AND FACT SHEETS FOR PRESIDENT'S TRIP TO CANADA\nSUBJECT:\nACTION FYI\nACTION FYI\nVICE PRESIDENT\nMcMANUS\nREGAN\nMURPHY\nDEAVER\nOGLESBY\nSTOCKMAN\nROLLINS\nBUCHANAN\nSPEAKES\nCHEW\nP\nSS\nSVAHN\nFIELDING\nTUTTLE\nFRIEDERSDORF\nVERSTANDIG\nFULLER\nWHITTLESEY\nHICKEY\nSIMS\nHICKS\nKINGON\nMcFARLANE\nREMARKS: Attached are the Joint Summary and Fact Sheets, prepared by the\nState Department and cleared by the NSC. In order for State to present\nthis draft to the Canadians by close of business today, please provide\nyour written changes to Bob Kimmitt by noon today, with an information\ncopy to this office. You may telephone concurrences to Nick Klissas,\nExt. 6959. Thank you.\nNOTE: PLEASE LIMIT. DISTRIBUTION OF THIS DOCUMENT\nRESPONSE:\nDavid L. Chew\nStaff Secretary\nExt. 2702\n1085\nHAR\n15\nTHE QUEBEC SUMMIT\nSUMMARY\nPresident Reagan and Prime Minister Mulroney met at Quebec City\non March 17-18 for three sessions of talks. The principal\nachievements of the visit were:\n*\nagreement to appoint Special Envoys to examine the\nacid rain issue and report to the President and the\nPrime Minister by their next meeting.\n* a trade declaration reflecting the strong political\ncommitment of the two leaders to create a more\nsecure, predictable environment for trade. They\nspecifically:\n:\ncommitted themselves to halt protectionism on\ncross-border trade in goods and services;\n:\nadopted measures to enhance access to each\nother's markets and launched a program to\nexplore further means to facilitate and increase\ntrade and investment;\n--\nreaffirmed their commitment to a strong\nmultilateral trading system;\n* a declaration on international security\nreinvigorating the defense partnership between the\ntwo countries, and commiting both sides to consult\nclosely on security and arms control issues;\n* an Agreement on Modernization of North American Air\nDefense and North Warning System;\n*\nan exchange of instruments ratifying the new treaty\nto restore the west coast salmon fishery;\n*\nsigning of a Legal Assistance Treaty to help fight\ninternational criminal activity while respecting each\nother's sovereignty.\nThe Prime Minister informed the President that Canada has\naccepted the US invitation to participate in the space station\nproject.\nThe Canada/US relationship, interest rates and the dollar,\ndefense trade and improved Canadian access to the US defense\nand space market.\nTheir discussion also covered the crisis in Africa, human\nrights, East/West relations including the Prime Minister's trip\nto Moscow for Chernenko's funeral, the Geneva talks, the world\neconomic situation and preparations for the Bonn Summit.\nQuebec City\nMarch 18, 1985 =\nDECLARATION BY THE PRIME MINISTER OF CANADA AND\nTHE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES\nREGARDING TRADE IN GOODS AND SERVICES\nWe embark today on a joint effort to establish a climate of\ngreater predictability and confidence for Canadians and Americans\nalike to plan, invest, grow and compete more effectively with\none another and in the global market.\nWe are convinced that an improved and more secure climate for\nbilateral trade relations will encourage market forces to achieve\na more rational and competitive production and distribution\nof goods and services.\nWe remain committed to the principles of the multilateral trading\nsystem embodied in the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade\nas the cornerstone of our respective trade policies. We are\ndetermined to exercise the political will to make the open,\nmultilateral trading system work better and to strengthen and\nextend the disciplines governing international commerce.\nWe will work jointly to strengthen the effectiveness of GATT\nrules and establish new disciplines. We call on all nations\nto join with us in establishing a preparatory committee this\nsummer for a new round of multilateral trade negotiations to\nensure that negotiations commence in early 1986.\n- 2 -\nWe believe that the challenge to our two countries is to invigorate\nour unique economic relationship. We intend to build on our\nsuccess in resolving a number of disputes and achieve something\nof lasting significance to provide a model to other nations\nof the way in which two modern societies can work in harmony.\nWe have today agreed to give the highest priority to finding\nmutually-acceptable means to reduce and eliminate existing barriers\nto trade in order to secure and facilitate trade and investment\nflows.\nAs a first step, we commit ourselves to halt protectionism in\ncross-border trade in goods and services.\nWe have charged Ambassador Brock, the United States Trade\nRepresentative, and the Honorable James Kelleher, Minister for\nInternational Trade, to establish immediately a bilateral mechanism\nto chart all possible ways to reduce and eliminate existing\nbarriers to trade and to report to us within six months.\nWe have also directed that action be undertaken over the next\ntwelve months to resolve specific impediments to trade in a\nmanner consistent with our international obligations and with\nour legislative requirement. Such action will proceed on the\nbasis of full consultation with the private sector and other\nlevels of government and will concentrate initially on:\n- 3 -\n-- national treatment, on a contractual, equitable and\nmutually advantageous basis, with respect to government\nprocurement and funding programs;\n-- standardization, reduction or simplification of regulatory\nrequirements which would facilitate trade in goods\nand services;\n-- improvement in the Canada-United States Air Transport\nAgreement aimed at facilitating transborder travel\nand commerce by expanding the number of available\nservices and reducing obstacles to the introduction\nof innovative and competitive new services;\n-- strengthening our market approach to Canada-United\nStates energy trade by reducing restrictions, particularly\nthose on petroleum imports and exports, and by maintaining\nand extending open access to each other's energy markets,\nincluding oil, natural gas, electricity and coal;\n-- improving access for traders on both sides of the\nborder through reductions in tariff barriers;\n-- facilitation of travel for business and commercial\npurposes;\n- 4 -\n-- elimination or reduction of tariff and non-tariff\nbarriers to trade in high-technology goods and related\nservices, such as computers, data flow and computer-\nassisted design and manufacturing technology; and\n-- cooperation to protect intellectual property rights\nincluding trade in counterfeit goods and other abuses\n-\nof copyright and patent law.\nWe urge our respective private sectors to expand their contacts\nand continue to provide advice on the future of our trading\nrelationship.\nWe are confident that these undertakings will facilitate trade\nand investment flows between our two countries and act as catalysts\nfor broader international cooperation.\nFACT SHEET\nRESOLUTION OF IRRITANTS\nThe President and the Prime Minister today indicated that the\ntwo governments had resolved a number of irritants which had\nmarred the relationship and frustrated traders and investors\non both sides of the border. These include the following:\n-- Country-of-Origin Marking Requirements: The President\nis pursuing the necessary legislative steps to eliminate\nthe trade-restrictive effect of a requirement in the Trade\nand Tariff Act of 1984 that all imported iron and steel\npipes be physically marked in such a manner as to clearly\nidentify the country of origin.\n-- Tax-Free Treatment of Certain Tourist Literature: The\nPrime Minister has today indicated that action will be\ntaken to exempt from the federal sales tax tourist literature\nissued by national or state governments or departments\nthereof, boards of trade, chambers of commerce, municipal\nand automobile associations, and similar organizations,\nwhether produced in Canada or imported. This should stimulate\ntourism in both Canada and the United States.\n-- Improved Administration of Quotas on Specialty Steel:\nCanada, at the request of the United States, agreed in\n1983 to an orderly marketing arrangement in respect to\n- 2 -\nspecialty steel exports to the United States. Canada has\ncomplied with this arrangement, but Canadian shippers have\nexperienced delays at the U.S. border as a result of U.S.\nCustoms requirements. The President today indicated that\nsteps will be taken to facilitate the shipment of Canadian\nspecialty steel exported within the terms of the orderly\nmarketing arrangement.\n-- Settlement of a Number of Outstanding Safeguards Issues:\nOver the years, Canada and the United States have both\nimposed temporary quotas, surcharges or extra duties to\nprotect particular industries seriously injured by imports,\nas they adjust to changed competitive conditions. The\nGATT provides that affected countries may withdraw equivalent\nconcessions or request offsetting compensation as an alterna-\ntive. The President and the Prime Minister announced that\nthe slate will be wiped clean with respect to compensation\nrights for those actions which are no longer in effect.\n-- Easing of Certain U.S. Restrictions on the Imports of Certain\nSugar-Containino Products: The President today undertook\nbest efforts to exempt certain sugar-containing products\nfrom restrictions imposed under Section 22 of the Agricultural\nAdjustment Act.\n-- Copyricht: Cable/Satellite Retransmission: The Prime\nMinister informed the President that it is the Government's\n- 3 -\nintention to meet the challenge of creating an appropriate\nand balanced copyright environment. To this end, the Minister\nof Communications has recently referred proposed revisions\nin Canada's Copyright Act to the Parliamentary Committee\non Communications and Culture for consideration. The Prime\nMinister assured the President that revision of the Act\nis a priority. The Prime Minister undertook that best\nefforts would be made to accommodate U.S. concerns on the\nprotection of programing retransmitted by cable or satellite\nwhen the Government develops legislative proposals.\nASSIFIED\nBy\nWhite smp House Guidelines, August 1997\nNARA,\nDate\n8/5/05\nCONFIDENTIAL\nUS Redraft #3 (March 14, 1985)\nDeclaration by the Prime Minister of Canada\nand the President of the United States\nRegarding International Security\nWe are neighbors and allies dedicated to the defense and\nnourishment of peace and freedom. The security of Canada and\nthe United States are inextricably linked.\nWe have committed ourselves at Quebec to reinvigorate the\ndefense and security partnership between the two countries. To\nreenforce deterrence and to reduce the risk posed by threat of\nnuclear attack, we agreed to strengthen continental defense,\nwith particular reference to our joint participation in the\nNorth American Aerospace Defense Command. Accordingly, we\nconcluded an agreement to modernize the North American Air\nDefense Surveillance and Warning System. We agreed that in\nimplementing this program, as in all of our defense relations,\nwe shall be guided by the principle of mutual respect for the\nsovereignty of our two countries.\nIn the spirit of mutual trust and confidence between our\ncountries, we have committed ourselves to consult fully,\nfrankly, and regularly on defense and arms control matters.\nTo permit systematic consultation and overall review, at\nthe most senior levels, of arrangements bearing on the security\nof Canada and the United States, we resolved that the\nresponsible ministers of our governments will meet together on\na regular basis. We have also agreed to make greater use of the\n-2-\nPermament Joint Board on Defense, established at the historic\nmeeting of Prime Minister Mackenzie King and President Franklin\nDelano Roosevelt at Ogdensburg forty-five years ago.\nTo provide for an effective use of resources and to aid\nboth of our countries in bearing our share of the Allied\ndefense burden, we reaffirm the Canada/United States Defense\nProduction and Development Sharing Arrangements and agree to\nstrengthen our North American Defense Industrial base.\nRecognizing the importance of access to, and participation of\nCanadian firms in the US defense market, we will work to reduce\nbarriers and stimulate the flow of defence goods. We will seek\nto improve our joint access to information relating to defense\nprocurement and we will explore ways to establish a separate\ndesignation for mobilization base suppliers for US and Canadian\nfirms. We will also undertake to establish a freer exchange\nbetween both countries of technical knowledge and skills\ninvolved in defense production, in order to facilitate defense\neconomic/trade cooperation and joint participation in major\ndefense programs. In this connection, we agree to strengthen\nour cooperation to ensure that transfers of strategic\ntechnology to our potential adversaries are effectively\ncontrolled. Accordingly, we have directed the responsible\nministers to give priority attention to all these issues and to\nprovide a progress report within six months.\nThe Security of Canada and the United States is\ninseparable from that of the European members of the North\nAtlantic Alliance. We remain fully dedicated to preserving the\nsecurity of the Alliance as a whole through the maintenance of\nadequate military strength, an effective deterrent posture, and\n-3-\na stable balance of forces. We attach great importance to our\ncontinuing commitment to station Canadian and United States\nforces in Europe. We think it is essential to strengthen\nNATO's conventional capabilities and accordingly reiterate our\ndetermination to continue substantial real growth in\nexpenditures for defense.\nWe share a commitment to deepening the dialogue among the\nAllies. Our Alliance draws strength from the unique and\nindividual contributions of its sovereign members in the\npursuit of our common goal of peace with freedom. The cohesion\nand political solidarity of the Alliance, maintained through\nfrequent and timely consultations, remain the foundation for\nthe protection of our common interests and values.\nSignificant, equitable, durable and verifiable arms\ncontrol measures can play an role in strengthening strategic\nstability, maintaining our security at a lower level of force\nand armament, building trust and confidence between East and\nWest, and reducing the risk of war. We have agreed to consider\njoint research efforts to strengthen our capacity to verify\nagreements on the control of armaments. We will work to gain\nagreement on effective measures in the international\nnegotiations in Vienna, Geneva, and Stockholm, and we will\nstrive, with the countries of Europe, to progress towards the\naims enshrined in the Helsinki Final Act.\n- -4-\nWe further agreed that we can have no higher goal than the\nreduction and eventual elimination of the threat to peace,\nwhether by nuclear or conventional means. Our aim is not to\nachieve superiority, but to enhance deterrence of armed\naggression and bring about significant arms reductions between\nEast and West. We seek a more stable world, with greatly\nreduced levels of nuclear arms. The prospect of an enhanced\nability to deter war based upon an increasing contribution of\ndefenses, particularly non-nuclear defenses, against offensive\nnuclear arms has prompted the United States research effort\nembodied in the President's strategic defense initiative. We\nare agreed that this effort is prudent and is in full\nconformity with the ABM Treaty. We recognize that deployment\nwould, in view of Treaty obligations, have to be a matter for\nnegotiations.\nDialogue and negotiation between the United States and the\nSoviet Union at Geneva provide a historic opportunity to set\nEast-West relations on a more secure foundation. We hope that\nthese negotiations will lead to major steps toward the\nprevention of an arms race in space and to terminating it on\nearth, limiting and reducing nuclear arms, and, ultimately,\neliminating them everywhere.\nThe security of Canada and the United States is linked\nincreasingly with that of other regions of the world. We will\n-5-\ntherefere encourage and support the strengthening of\nmultilateral and international mechanisms for the control and\npeaceful resolution of disputes. We will vigorously oppose the\nexploitation of regional instability, and promote at the same\ntime, each by our distinctive contributions, the social,\neconomic, and political development essential to the achievment\nof a stable and enduring peace.\nOur one truly strategic aim is human freedom in a world at\npeace.\ndoc. 5365A\nas given to 600 at 11:30 Am 3/14\nthey have now concurred.\ncom\nFINAL ACID RAIN LANGUAGE AS AGREED BY THE NSC 3/14/85\nThe President and the Prime Minister also discussed\nenvironmental matters at some length. They took note of the\n75-year history of environmental cooperation between the two\ncountries as exemplified by the Boundary Waters Treaty, the\nGreat Lakes Water Quality Agreement, and the recent Skagit\nRiver/Ross Dam Treaty. The President and the Prime Minister\nexpressed their determination to continue to deal with all\nUS-Canadian environmental issues in a responsible and\ncooperative spirit.\nIn the spirit of cooperation and in recognition that the\nactions of one country are of concern to the other, there was\nagreement that a high level Special Envoy would be appointed by\neach Government to examine the acid rain issue and report to\nthe President and the Prime Minister by their next meeting.\nThe Envoys will:\n-- Pursue consultations on laws and regulations that bear\non pollutants thought to be linked to acid rain;\n-- Enhance cooperation in research efforts, including\nthat for clean fuel technology and smelter controls;\n-- Pursue means to increase exchange of relevant\nscientific information;\n-- Identify efforts to improve the US and Canadian\nenvironment. (End Text)\nNote: The Canadians have suggested releasing this\nstatement in two \"pieces\" at different times. The point\nremains open.\nWWM/jrs\nNo. 5465A\nFACT SHEET\nMEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING AND EXCHANGE OF NOTES\nON THE MODERNIZATION OF THE NORTH AMERICAN AIR DEFENSE SYSTEM\nI.\nPURPOSE OF THE AGREEMENT\nO\nThe Memorandum of Understanding and Exchange of Notes\nprovide the basis for a joint US-Canadian effort to\nmodernize NORAD's air defense warning and surveillance\nsystem. The agreement also underscores the determ-\nination of both countries to cooperate closely in\nassuring the security of the North American continent.\nII. BACKGROUND TO THE AGREEMENT\nThe United States and Canada have cooperated on North\nAmerican air defense since the 1950's. The joint\nNorth American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD),\nestablished in 1957, has been the principal vehicle\nfor this cooperation and has been a major element of\nour deterrent posture.\nThe Distant Early Warning (DEW) Line, a system of\nradars in Alaska, northern Canada, and Greenland, was\nconstructed in the late 1950's, and, together with\nthe CADIN/ PINETREE system, provided early warning\nagainst potential bomber attack against the\ncontinent. Although these systems remain\noperational, they have become obsolescent against the\nincreased threat of low-level attacks by bombers and\ncruise missiles.\nDiscussions concerning an upgrading of the DEW Line\nand modernization of NORAD's early warning capability\nbegan in the mid-1970's and reflected the concerns of\nboth countries. Actual negotiations on the current\nsystem have been underway for several years and\nculminated in agreement earler this month.\nIII. MAIN PROVISIONS\nThe modernized North American air defense system will\ninclude the following elements: a North Warning\nSystem comprising 13 Long Range Radar and 39 Short\nRange Radar stations deployed across northern Alaska,\nnorthern Canada, and down the Labrador coast, a\ncommunication network to ensure full system integra-\ntion, and a life cycle support and maintenance\ncapability; over-the-horizon-backscatter radar\ncoverage provided from sites located within the\n-2-\nUnited States; airborne radar coverage in North\nAmerica provided by USAF Airborne Warning and Control\nSystem aircraft; forward operating locations and\ndispersed operating bases for AWACS and fighter\naircraft at existing airfields in Canada; and\ncommunications and other equipment necessary to\npermit command and control of intercepts.\nThe US and Canada will share the costs of the North\nWarning System on an approximately 60/40 basis.\nThe US will fund the over-the-horizon-backscatter\nradars, with Canadian personnel costs to be borne by\nCanada.\nCost-sharing for the forward operating locations and\ndispersed operating bases and for a possible\nrequirement for coastal radars is to be established\nby later agreement.\nFact Sheet:\nMemorandum of Understanding and Exchange of Notes on the\nModernization of the North American Air Defense System\nDrafted:EUR/CAN:SFromowitz:db\nClearances:EUR/CAN:CBrown\nMr\n3/14/85 632-3135\nMr\nDOD/OAUSD:DZakheim/\ndoc. 5504A\nMr\nFACT SHEET\nPACIFIC SALMON TREATY\nI.\nPURPOSE OF TREATY\nThis treaty establishes a basis for bilateral\ncooperation in salmon management, research, and\nenhancement. It establishes a bilateral commission\nwith coastwide responsibilities for management of\n\"intercepting\" salmon fisheries, fisheries of one\ncountry that harvest fish which spawn in the waters\nof the other country.\nII. BACKGROUND OF NEGOTIATIONS\nO\nPacific salmon is one of the most valued resources of\nthe Northwest, prized by fishermen of both Canada and\nthe United States. Effective salmon management and\nconservation requires international cooperation\nbecause salmon stocks often are subject to harvest by\nfishermen from both countries as they migrate between\nthe ocean and freshwater spawning grounds.\nO\nFor fourteen years, the United States and Canada have\nsought to develop a coastwide salmon management\nregime. The absence of such an approach has, in some\ncases, resulted in overfishing, and has inhibited\nsalmon conservation and enhancement actions in both\ncountries. In recent years, negotiations were\nspurred by the growing scarcity of many salmon stocks\noff Alaska, British Columbia, and the Pacific\nNorthwest.\nIII.\nMAIN PROVISIONS\nThis treaty supercedes the Fraser River Convention\nunder which the Fraser River sockeye and pink salmon\nfisheries have been managed since 1937.\nAnnexes to this treaty prescribe specific fishery\nregimes, establishing allocations, annual catch\nlevels, and broad regulations by time, area, or gear\nfor transboundary rivers, the northern boundary area,\nchinook salmon, Fraser River pink and sockeye,\nSouthern coho and chum. Such annexes may be\npromulgated or amended through exchange of diplomatic\nnotes.\nFACT SHEET\nUS-CANADA MUTUAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE TREATY\nI.\nPURPOSE OF TREATY\nThe treaty is intended \"to improve the effectiveness\nof both countries in the investigation, prosecution\nand suppression of crime through cooperation and\nmutual legal assistance in law enforcement matters.\"\nII. BACKGROUND OF NEGOTIATIONS\nWhile law enforcement regulations are generally\nexcellent, problems have arisen over US subpoenas\nserved on Canadians.\nCanada accepted a US proposal to negotiate a treaty\nto regularize procedures and provide mutual\nassistance in criminal matters.\nIII. MAIN PROVISIONS\nThe treaty partner seeking documents known to be\nlocated in the other country would be obligated to\nrequest assistance under the treaty before resorting\nto other means, such as enforcement of a subpoena.\n0\nIf denial of a request or delay might jeopardize\nsuccessful completion of an investigation,\nconsultations would be held to consider alternatives.\no\nThe specific kinds of assistance which one state\nwould provide the other include: providing documents\nand records, taking the evidence of persons,\nexecuting requests for searches and seizures,\ntransferring persons in custody and other related\nforms of legal assistance.\nFACT SHEET\nCANADIAN PARTICIPATION IN THE MANNED SPACE STATION\nI.\nNATURE OF THE MANNED SPACE STATION (MSS)\nA modular facility, designed for growth and a wide\nvariety of Western space activity well into the next\ncentury.\nII THE PRESIDENT'S INVITATION FOR FOREIGN CONTRIBUTIONS\nIn directing NASA to build the MSS, the President\ninvited our friends to join us in\nthis program. Japan, Canada, and\nthe nations represented by the\nEuropean Space Agency have indicated interest.\nIII CANADA DECIDES TO PARTICIPATE\nCanada has a long history of space activity in\ncooperation with the US, notably the \"CANADARM\" for\nthe Space Shuttle.\nRecently the Canadian Government decided to make a\nsimilar, major contribution to the MSS. The USG\nwelcomes this Canadian decision.\nThe Prime Minister and the President are expected to\ndiscuss the matter during the Summit.\nSignature of an MOU, spelling out the details of the\ncooperative effort, is expected very soon thereafter.\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nFebruary 26, 1986\nMEMORANDUM FOR RONALD F. LEHMAN, II\nSPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT\nFROM:\nJOHN G. ROBERTS\nAND SENIOR DIRECTOR OXL\nASSOCIATE COUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT\nSUBJECT:\nFact Sheet for the President's Peace\nand National Security Address\nCounsel's Office has reviewed the above-referenced fact sheet\nand finds no objection to it from a legal perspective.\nCC: David L. Chew\nID #\nCU\nWHITE HOUSE\nCORRESPONDENCE TRACKING WORKSHEET\no OUTGOING\nH INTERNAL\nI\nINCOMING\nDate Correspondence\nReceived (YY/MM/DD)\n/\n/\nName of Correspondent:\nMI Mail Report\nUser Codes: (A)\n(B)\n(C)\nSubject: Fact sheet par the Presidents Peace\na national security address\nROUTE TO:\nACTION\nDISPOSITION\nTracking\nType\nCompletion\nAction\nDate\nof\nDate\nOffice/Agency\n(Staff Name)\nCode\nYY/MM/DD\nResponse\nCode\nYY/MM/DD\nCUHOLL\nORIGINATOR 86,02,26\n/\n/\nReferral Note:\ncuat 18\nR\n86,02,26\nS 86,02,26\nReferral Note:\n2pm\n/ /\n/\n/\nReferral Note:\n/\n/\n/ /\nReferral Note:\n/\n-\n/\n/\nReferral Note:\nACTION CODES:\nDISPOSITION CODES:\nA Appropriate Action\nI Info Copy Only/No Action Necessary\nA Answered\nc Completed\nC Comment/Recommendation\nR Direct Reply w/Copy\nB - Non-Special Referral\nS Suspended\nD Draft Response\nS For Signature\nF Furnish Fact Sheet\nX Interim Reply\nto be used as Enclosure\nFOR OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE:\nType of Response = Initials of Signer\nCode\nIf\n\"A\"\nCompletion Date = Date of Outgoing\nComments:\nKeep this worksheet attached to the original incoming letter.\nSend all routing updates to Central Reference (Room 75, OEOB).\nAlways return completed correspondence record to Central Files.\nRefer questions about the correspondence tracking system to Central Reference, ext. 2590.\n5/81\nDocument No.\nWHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORANDUM\nDATE: 2/26/86\nACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BY:\n2:00 p.m. TODAY\nSUBJECT: FACT SHEET FOR THE PRESIDENT'S PEACE AND NATIONAL SECURITY ADDRESS\nACTION FYI\nACTION FYI\nVICE PRESIDENT\nOGLESBY\nREGAN\nPOINDEXTER\nMILLER\n7\nRYAN\nBUCHANAN\nSPEAKES\nCHAVEZ\nSPRINKEL\nCHEW\nP\nSS STEELMAN\nDANIELS\nSVAHN\nFIELDING\nTHOMAS\nHENKEL\nTUTTLE\nHICKS\nKINGON\n16632\nLACY\nREMARKS:\nPlease provide any comments on the attached directly to\nRon Lehman of the NSC by 2:00 p.m. today, with an info\ncopy to my office. There will be a meeting at 2:00 p.m.\ntoday in my office for all those interested in responding\nto the fact sheet.\nRESPONSE:\nDavid L. Chew\nStaff Secretary\nExt. 2702\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nOffice of the Press Secretary\nFOR RELEASE AT 8:00 P.M.\nWEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 1986\nAddress by the President\non Peace and National Security\nWednesday, February 26, 1986\nPROGRESS REPORT ON THE REAGAN STRATEGY FOR THE FUTURE\n0\nSpeaking from the oval office, President Ronald Reagan today\nspoke of his \"highest duty as President -- to preserve peace and\ndefend these United States.\"\nO\nIn his address on \"Peace and National Security,\" President\nReagan spoke of the accomplishments of his Administration and of\nthe work still to be done. Peace \"depends on us -- on our\ncourage to build it and guard it and pass it on to future\ngenerations.\"\nO\nThe President stressed the necessity to provide adequate\nlevels of defense spending. After a 6% cut for 1986, the\nPresident characterized attempts to again reduce the defense\nbudget as \"reckless, dangerous, and wrong\" as well as inefficient\nand costly in the long run.\nO\nThe President cited the need for a strong defense as an\nessential part of his \"strategy for the future\" -- a strategy\nwhich he says has emphasized strength, innovation, efficiency,\nregional security, cooperation with friends and allies, and\nnegotiations.\no\n\"American power is an indispensable element of a peaceful\nworld,\" concluded the President, and \"we have the best chance in\ndecades of building a secure peace.\"\nTHE DANGER OF COMPLACENCY\nTHE PRESIDENT:\n\"Peace does not exist of its own will. It depends\non us -- on our courage to build it and guard it and\npass it on to future generations.\"\n\"the security program that you and I launched to\nrestore America's strength is in jeopardy -- threatened\nby those who would quit before the job is done.\"\n\"We need to remember where America was 5 years ago. We\nneed to recall the atmosphere of that time -- the\nanxiety that events were out of control, that the West\nwas in decline, that our enemies were on the march.\"\n2\n\"The Pentagon horror stories (of five years ago) ) were\nabout ships that couldn't sai, planes that couldn't\nfly for lack of spare parts, nd army divisions\nunprepared to fight.\"\nBACKGROUND\nO\nFrom 1970 to 1981, US defense spending declined nearly 20%\nin real terms.\nIn the past five years, we've reve: sed the decline.\nIn the 1986 Budget Resolution, the President agreed to a\ncompromise at zero real growth to be fo lowed by 3% annual\ngrowth.\nO\nBut after the automatic cuts provi ed by law for FY 1986,\nthe final defense spending level will re present a decline of\nnearly 6% in real terms from the previo S year.\nTHE SOVIET EFFORT HAS NOT EASED\nTHE PRESIDENT:\n\"Between 1970 and 1985 alone, the oviets invested $500\nbillion more than the United State: in defense -- and built\nnearly three times as many strateg. C missiles\n\"Today the Soviet Union has deploye d over one-and-a-half\ntimes as many combat aircraft as the e United States, nearly\nthree times as many submarines, OV I five times as many\ntanks, and over eleven times as many artillery pieces.\nWe anticipate that over the next 5 years, they will deploy\non the order of 40 nuclear submarimes, 500 new ballistic\nmissiles, and 18,000 modern tanks.\n\"Where the Soviets once relied on umbers alone, they now\nstrive for both quantity and quality.\"\nBACKGROUND:\nO\nThe Soviets have about 350 submarires; the US has about 140.\nO\nThe Soviets have about 51,000 tanks assigned to combat units\ncompared to 9900 US tanks.\no\nThe US has about 4600 artillery pietes assigned to combat\nunits, but the Soviets have about 53,000\nO\nThe Soviets have about 8500 tactica 1 fixed-wing combat\naircraft assigned to combat units compa: ed to 5300 for the US.\no\nThe Soviets produced 5500 Intercont inental ballistic\nmissiles and submarine launched ballisti C missiles from 1970 to\n1985.\nO\nSince the ABM Treaty of 1972, the Soviet Union has spent at\nleast as much on strategic defenses as on its extraordinary\nstrategic nuclear offensive build-up.\n3\n0\nThe Soviet Union's military establishment still accounts for\nabout 15% of their GNP, more than twice the US level of effort.\nO\nThe Soviet Union has spent an estimated $500 billion more\nbetween 1970 and 1985 in investment than has the United States.\nInvestment is defines as research and development, procurement,\nmilitary construction, and related activities.\nDEFENSE BUDGET IS MODEST: NOT CAUSE OF DEFICIT\nTHE PRESIDENT:\n\"Now the biggest increases in defense spending are\nbehind us. That's why, last summer, I agreed with Congress\nto freeze defense funding for 1 year, and after that to\nresume a modest 3-percent annual growth.\"\n\"But this didn't happen. Instead of a freeze, there\nwas a sharp cut -- a cut of over 5 percent. And some are\nnow saying that we need to chop another 20, 30, even 50\nbillion dollars out of national defense.\nThis is reckless, dangerous, and wrong.\"\nBACKGROUND:\no\nThe FY 1986 defense budget authority enacted and then\nreduced by Gramm-Rudman-Hollings, is $72 billion less than the\nPresident planned two years ago, $36 billion less than the\nPresident's modified 1986 request, and $16 billion less than\nCongress agreed to in the FY 1986 Budget Resolution. This is an\nannual reduction of almost 6% in real terms.\n4\nO\nThe President's FY 1987 defense budget request is $51\nbillion less than the 1987 level in the agreement reached with\nCongress in May of 1984 and $42 billion less than the 1987 level\nplanned just one year ago.\nO\nIn the 1950's, Defense was 40% of Net Public Spending, now\nit is about 23%.\nO\nIn the early 1960's, defense spending was about 50% of the\nFederal Budget, now it is only 28%.\nO\nDefense accounted for 9.4% of our GNP in 1962; in 1986 it is\nestimated at 6.3%.\nO\nDefense is not responsible for the deficit. Between FY 1980\nand FY 1985, federal revenues increased by $217 billion. Federal\nexpenditures increased by $355 billion, about one third of that\n($119 billion) was for defense.\nO\nThirty years ago, twice as much was spent on defense and as on\nentitlement programs. Fifteen years ago, spending on the two was\nabout the same. Today, entitlement programs are about 50%\nlarger.\nPRINCIPLES OF THE STRATEGY OF THE FUTURE\nEXPLOIT INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGY TO COUNTER SOVIET NUMERICAL\nADVANTAGES AND TO REDUCE THREAT OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS\nTHE PRESIDENT:\n\"Innovation is our advantage\n=\n\"Our goal should be to deter, if necessary, to repel\nany aggression without a resort to nuclear arms and one\nday free us all from the prison of nuclear terror.' \"\nBACKGROUND:\no\nThe Strategic Defense Initiative capitalizes on a\nhost of technological advances to explore possibilities\nof reducing the threat of nuclear weapons through greater\nreliance on defensive rather than offensive systems.\nO\nNATO, with American leadership, is exploring \"emerging\ntechnologies\" for improved conventional defenses and has been\nreducing the number of nuclear weapons in Europe.\nO\nAdvances in \"stealth\" can help neutralize the air defenses\nof the Soviet Union or other hostile states.\nO\nThe technology used in the Army tactical missile system\n(ATACMs) demonstrated in\nthe early 1980's the potential to attack a column of tanks at\nranges of 100 miles and beyond.\no\nNew non-nuclear cruise missiles can hit pin-point targets\nfrom hundreds of miles in all weather, night or day.\n5\n0\nBy exploiting our industrial dynamism and maintaining the\ntechnological edge, the US is not locked into a strategy of\nmatching the Soviet increases one for one. If they will be\nbigger, we must be better.\nSTRONG PARTNERSHIPS AROUND THE WORLD\nTHE PRESIDENT:\n\"\nour security assistance provides as much security\nfor the dollar as our own defense budget.\"\n\"Military assistance to friends in strategic regions\nstrengthens those who share our values and interests. \"\n\"\nwhen they are strong, we are\nstrengthened. It is in our interest to help them meet\nthreats that could ultimately bring harm to us as well.\"\nBACKGROUND:\nO\nSecurity assistance has helped deter conflicts in areas such\nas Korea, Pakistan, Morocco, and Somalia and has helped us secure\nair and port facilities in Southwest Asia.\nO\nSince 1981, the Administration has greatly expanded security\nassistance, notably a new program for Pakistan and increased\nfunding for Israel, Egypt, and Turkey and a vigorous response\nin Central America.\nO\nWe have provided quick response support in Central America\nand to Chad, Lebanon, Grenada, and Thailand and reacted quickly\nto urgent requests from Saudi Arabia and Morocco.\nO\nUS security assistance encourages stability, self reliance,\nand cost effective cooperation; Soviet foreign military programs\nare designed to develop economic and political dependence and are\nused to exacerbate regional tensions.\nMAKE THE MOST OF EACH DEFENSE DOLLAR\nTHE PRESIDENT:\n\"During my 1980 campaign, I called Federal waste and fraud\na national scandal. We knew we could never rebuild\nAmerica's strength without first controlling the exploding\ncost of defense programs. And we're doing it.\"\n\"\n(I) n 1981, costs had been escalating at an annual rate\nof\n14\npercent. (I) n the last 2 years, cost increases have\nfallen to less than 1 percent. \"\nBACKGROUND:\nO\nAnnual cost growth in major new systems was 1% in 1983 and\n0.8% in 1984.\nO\nExamples of cost reductions include:\n6\n-- The F-18 fighter costs $4 million less today than in\n1982 ($18.7 million vice $22.5 million) and is over $5 million\nless than the 1981 price ($24.1 million)\n--\nThe AIM-9M (Sidewinder) air-to-air missile cost\n$116,000 in 1981, in 1985 it cost $60,200, about half as much.\nO\nProcurement horror stories are actually very few and have\nnormally been identified by the Defense Department itself. For\nexample, the infamous $435 hammer was or e of some 80,000 hammers\npurchased for between $6 and $8. Rememi er, the Defense\nDepartment must process some 15 million contract actions annually\nwith over 300,000 contractors. Errors ill be made and abuses\ncan occur, but they will not be tolerat d.\nO\nSecretary Weinberger has made exter sive improvements in the\nacquisition process.\nO\nAccording to the Congressional Budget Office, the costs of a\nNavy cruiser (CG-47) dropped 9% between 1983 and 1985; the B-1B\nbomber dropped 9%; the M-1 tank dropped 8%; and the F-16 fighter\ndropped 3%.\n0\nThe Defense Contract Audit Agency has conducted over 60,000\naudits annually producing an estimated savings of $10 billion\nover the last 2 years.\n0\nAn independent Inspector General has been established.\nO\nThe President will receive on February 28th the report of\nthe Packard Commission which he appointed to develop\nrecommendations going beyond the improvements already made.\no\nThe Administration stands ready to work with the Congress to\nimprove effectiveness and efficiency in both the Executive and\nLegislative processes by providing improved future planning,\nbetter organization, expedited action, more long term stability,\nand less micro-management.\nLASTING PEACE REQUIRES NEGOTIATION FROM STRENGTH\nTHE PRESIDENT:\n\"Lets maintain that crucial level of national strength,\nunity, and purpose that has brought the Soviet Union to\nthe negotiating table, and has given us this historic\nopportunity to achieve real reductions in nuclear\nweapons and a real chance at lasting peace. That would\nbe the finest legacy we could leave behind -- for our\nchildren and for their children.\"\n\"We want agreements that truly diminish the nuclear\ndanger. We don't just want signing cermonies and color\nphotographs of leaders toasting each other with\nchampagne. We want real agreements -- agreements that\nreally work -- with no cheating.\"\nBACKGROUND:\nO\nAt the Geneva Summit the Soviet Union and the United States\nagreed to accelerate progress in the nuclear arms talks in\n7\nGeneva, to work toward a interim INF agreement, and to work\ntoward a 50% reduction in offensive nuclear arms appropriately\napplied. They also agreed to two more summits; one in the United\nStates and one in the Soviet Union.\nO\nJust this week, the United States put forth a new proposal\nwhich set forth a concrete schedule for the elimination of\nnuclear, land-based LRINF missiles in Europe, Asia, and globally.\nO\nThe US has put forth a proposal in Geneva which would\nprovide for a 50% reductions in nuclear arms in a manner which\nwould enhance stability. Both the US and the USSR would reduce\nto 4500 ballistic missile warheads and 1500 air launched cruise\nmissiles as well as strategic bombers.\nO\nThe US has put forth a draft treaty banning the production\nof chemical weapons and providing for effective verification.\nO\nThe US and its allies just put forth a new proposal on\nreductions in conventional forces in Europe at the MBFR (Mutual\nand Balanced Force Reduction) talks in\nVienna.\nO\nDrafting has begun at the Conference on Confidence and\nSecurity-Building Measures in Europe (CDE) being held in\nStockholm.\nO\nThe US and the USSR are implementing a new agreement to\nupgrade the Direct Communications Link -- the \"Hotline\" and the\nUS has proposed discussions on the establishment of \"Nuclear Risk\nReduction Centers.\"\nO\nAt the Nuclear and Space Talks, the US is discussing with\nthe Soviet Union how we might transition to a better, safer world\ninvolving greater emphasis on defenses rather than massive\narsenals of offensive nuclear weapons and has proposed an \"open\nlaboratories\" initiative to build confidence that each sides\nprograms for strategic defense are not threatening.\nO\nThe United States has repeatedly offered a number of\ninitiatives to provide for effective verification of existing\nnuclear test limitations contained in the Threshold Test Ban\nTreaty and the Peaceful Nuclear Explosions Treaty."
}