Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
323150895
label
Commonwealth Club 2/7/90 [OA 4391] [2]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
323150895
contentType
document
title
Commonwealth Club 2/7/90 [OA 4391] [2]
citationUrl
identifierLocal
13519-011
collections
Records of the White House Office of Speechwriting (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Speech Draft Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
323150895
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
62446010313f7693
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
S
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the George Bush Presidential
Library Staff.
Record Group/Collection:
George H.W. Bush Presidential Records
Collection/Office of Origin:
Speechwriting, White House Office of
Series:
Speech File Draft Files
Subseries:
Chron File, 1989-1993
OA/ID Number:
13519
Folder ID Number:
13519-011
Folder Title:
Commonwealth Club 2/7/90 [OA 4391] [2]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
25
6
7
4
OFFICE OF THE VICE PRESIDENT
WASHINGTON
February 5, 1990
NOTE TO: CHRISS WINSTON
FROM:
BILL KRISTOL BK/KBC
Here are two suggested changes to the Commonwealth Club speech.
1.
Last paragraph on page 6, after "Of course, some complain of
the cost of developing such technologies:" "In fact, the
cost of strategic defenses has been falling rapidly. And
the critics should further consider
"
Then, last sentence on page 6 - top of page 7, should read:
"That is why I will seek to persuade the Soviets, in our
Defense and Space talks, that in fact greater reliance on
strategic defenses will contribute to a safer world."
2.
The third full paragraph on page 7 should end, following
"We must be ready:" "We must not leave America defenseless
against such a threat."
CC: Jim Cicconi
90 FEB 5 P3: 28
6
No matter how urgently we want to cross that bridge between
nations, to cross to a new and more promising world, we should
not, in our haste, abandon the path that brought us to this
moment.
First, as Americans have always done, our foremost goal is
to prevent another world war. To do so, we will still need what
the people in the Pentagon call a forward defense. Let me tell
you what a forward defense means. America spans a continent, but
in strategic terms, we are an island nation. And an island
nation must defend itself before a threat can reach its shores.
And that is why we will continue to have a forward presence --
fighting forces\\ and American troops\\ with global reach.
Second, we will, of course, continue to reduce the
likelihood of a nuclear war. And that is why I will aggressively
pursue Strategic Arms Reduction Talks with the Soviet Union.
But arms control and strategic modernization are not competing
strategies. Rather, they can work together to make the world a
safer place.
Just this morning, I visited Lawrence Livermore Labs and met
those visionary men and women who strive to make an all-out
nuclear strike on our country, or a limited strike from a madman,
even more unlikely than it is today. Of course, some complain of
In fact, the cost of strategic defenses
the cost of developing such technologies., They should first
has been
falling
consider the cost of not doing all we can to protect the cities
repally
And
and citizens of America. That is why I will seek to persuade the
The
critic
greater release in
7
that in defenses con -
Soviets, through our Defense and Space talks, to use SDI_to help
will contribute
a
us-all make a transition to safer world.
Let me now tell you the ways in which our 1991 defense
strategy is a dramatic departure from the military strategies of
the past.
First, new threats are emerging outside the traditional
East-West antagonism of the past 45 years. Ever since the
Mayaguez incident, most conflicts involving U.S. forces -- like
our actions in Libya or Panama -- have had nothing to do with
Soviet expansionism. Nowhere was this more apparent than in the
Persian Gulf two years ago, where only the U.S. Navy could secure
the flow of oil to the industrial democracies.
Even worse, there are 15 countries in the world that are
developing ballistic missile technology, many with chemical and
biological weapons. Despite our best efforts, nuclear weapons
are proliferating. And inevitably high-tech weapons will fall
into the hands of leaders whose hatred of America is well known.
We must be ready. We must develop and deplay the Snategic Depease
not leave America depenseless against such Anticative a Threat.
Then there are the narco-gangsters -- already a threat to
our national health and spirit. Now they are taking on the
dimensions of a geopolitical force. And they must be dealt with
as such -- by our military -- in the air and on the seas. III
Clearly, in the future, we will need to be able to repel a
missile, arrest a drug lord or protect a sealane. We will need
forces adaptable to conditions anywhere in the world. We need
Document No.
OFFICE OF THE VICE PRESIDENT
STAFFING MEMORANDUM
DATE:
ACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BY:
SUBJECT:
ACTION
FYI
ACTION
FYI
KRISTOL
X
KREMER
ABRAHAM
PERNICE
FERNEAU
BALZANO
DUGAN
DeSutter
x
BECKWITH
LORD
X
GRIBBIN
WILSON
ZOELLER
REMARKS:
RESPONSE:
90 FEB 5 P3: 34
Return to: Myrna Dugan
Staff Secretary
Room 267
456-6772
Document No. 110556SS
WHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORANDUM
DATE:
2/5/90
ACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BY:
2/5/90 4:00 PM
SUBJECT:
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: COMMONWEALTH CLUB
ACTION FYI
ACTION FYI
VICE PRESIDENT
MCCLURE
SUNUNU
NEWMAN
SCOWCROFT
PORTER
DARMAN
ROGICH
BATES
UNTERMEYER
CARD
ROGERS
CICCONI
WINSTON
DEMAREST
PINKERTON
FITZWATER
GRAY
HAGIN
REMARKS:
Please forward any comments directly to Chriss Winston, Rm. 122,
x2930, no later than 4:00 PM TODAY, Monday, February 5, with a
copy to my office. Thank you.
RESPONSE:
James W. Cicconi
Assistant to the President
and Deputy to the Chief of Staff
Ext. 2702
Davis/Martin
January 29, 1990
Title: SF
1990 FEB -5 PM 12: 15
Draft: Three
PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: COMMONWEALTH CLUB, SAN FRANCISCO
Noon, Wednesday, February 7th, 1990
( (Acknowledgements to come. ))
( (A few minutes ago, I asked a 49er fan what he thought was
the turning point in the Super Bowl. He said "the National
Anthem. ) )
((Of course, not all recent memories in the Bay Area have
been pleasant ones. I'm sure you remember the last time I was
here, after this city suffered a tragedy and found renewal. I
remember a clutter of car wrecks, collapsed buildings, flattened
freeways\ and a terrible black cloud rising from the Marina
District. Some damage remains. But today I've seen something
else -- the people of the Bay Area have stood up, dusted
themselves off and rebuilt. The devastation and danger are past.
Because you came together, San Francisco is as beautiful as
ever\ -- San Francisco is back. ) )
I have come back to California for another reason, to give
you -- no-nonsense, hardnosed businessmen and women that you are
-- a straightforward, but hopeful, message about our national
security. Yesterday, at Fort Irwin, I also thanked our men and
women in uniform -- not just because they keep America safe and
And today at Livermore
National Laboratory,
2
free. I came to thank them because they help to make possible
the wonderful changes that are sweeping the world.
And as the threats to American security change, so too must
our defense strategy. In 1986, defense expenditures consumed 6.5
percent of our Gross National Product. As you know, I just
submitted my 1991 budget to Congress, which cuts defense for the
unuch large. much large
fifth year in a row -- to almost 5 percent of GNP.
$
I am submitting this budget at a time when the postwar world
we know -- the world that began in 1945 -- is changing before our
very eyes. So to understand where we are going, let me first
review where we have been and where we are today.
The first generation of postwar leaders had the cautionary
example of their predecessors. They remembered that visionary
statesmen, after the First World War, had outlawed large navies.
They remembered that their predecessors had even outlawed war
itself. But no pact prevented World War Two.
So by 1945 our leaders had acquired a patience, 11 a
pragmatism, 11 born of a sober appraisal of the world as it was.
And from Harry Truman, to John F. Kennedy, to Ronald Reagan, we
paid any price, we bore any burden, in the defense of liberty.
We paid with part of our national wealth. And many brave
Americans paid with their very lives.
Yet over the past 40 years, our leaders continued to seek
peace even as they provided for war. It was during the Truman
Administration, in this very city, that men and women of great
vision and high ideals came from around the world to create a
3
parliament of nations. And so it was in San Francisco, 45 years
ago, that the United Nations was born.
Then, as now, the United States strove to balance its role
as peace-keeper with that of peace-maker. We helped create the
United Nations and NATO; we encouraged Soviet reform even as we
rebuffed Soviet expansion.
Those who crafted this new policy, and called it
containment, predicted that if we blocked the easy path of
expansion, then the Soviet Union would one day have to confront
its inhumane, illogical system. The purpose of this
confrontation was not to defeat or to humiliate the Soviets. The
purpose was to lead to a "mellowing of the Soviet Union." It
took a half a century to vindicate this strategy, and at long
last we can say it works: And that is why the Cold War today is
in retreat.
That is good news, for no sane man or woman is nostalgic for
the Cold War. We are inspired by the Revolution of '89 --
delighted to see a man of letters and conscience in Prague move
from prison to the presidential palace. We are heartened to see
the Berlin Wall fall, setting off a shockwave that upended a
tyrant in Romania.
And we are grateful for something more. The likelihood of a
war with the Soviets has always been small, because of our
him much
strength and that of our Allies. Now, thanks to the courageous
Thes what for
reforms of a dynamic Soviet leader, the threat of war is smaller
than ever before.
Like Harold MacMillian before him,
haven Also 5° him
4
President Gorbachev freely acknowledges that empire is a burden,
more problem than protection. And so now "the winds of change"
are shaping a new destiny for the nations of the Continent --
that of a Europe whole and free.
We are taking the first steps across a bridge begun by
others long ago. It is a bridge that can lead us from seemingly
endless conflict to the promise of a lasting peace. But no
matter how great the promise, a bridge between nations must be
reinforced with realism.
As President, I receive a briefing every morning from the
Central Intelligence Agency. And I get from the CIA the best
intelligence available to any world leader today. Yet I often
find that the events reported to me by the CIA in the morning are
latebrenking
of that morning.
overcome by the news in the evening. The world is simply moving
too fast for any person or organization to forecast what will
happen next. With so much that is unpredictable, the promising
future we seek must be weighed against the realities of today.
ourallies and by
My most recent proposal, warmly received by President
Gorbachev, was to reduce land forces on both sides in Central
Europe to 195,000 troops. That's the prospect for change, and it
holds great promise.
But the reality? -- The Soviets still have almost 600,000
men under arms in Central Europe today.
Another example: Because of the new openness in Moscow, we
hope to slash the number of strategic weapons on both sides to
5
6,000. That's the prospect for change, and it too holds great
promise.
But the reality? -- the Soviets still have ((number))
strategic weapons. And they are still developing, at a furious
- bombers, - SLBM2, - 55BNs,
pace, two new mobile strategic weapons systems and a strategic
defense initiative.
I am your Commander-in-Chief. I am bound by the
Constitution to defend and protect the United States of America.
And I cannot, as some would have me do, predicate our defense on
promising, but as of yet unfulfilled, hopes for the future. Our
national defense strategy must not be a response to the professed
intentions of other nations, but to the weapons they hold in
their hands. That's the reality we face.
You certainly don't do business on the basis of a promise.
The banks you do business with expect collateral. And I will
seek from the Soviets the collateral to implement a new peace.
In international terms, collateral means: soldiers
decommissioned, tanks dismantled, and nuclear missiles
demolished.
Some see our measured approach as endangering the process of
change. I see our approach as essential to change, as the only
way to a lasting peace. We have shown that American resolve
leads to Soviet reform. We have shown that American strength is
an
essential prereguisite
the catalyst for arms control. We are all excited by change in
the East, but we must not let impatience, born of euphoria, ruin
all we have achieved.
6
No matter how urgently we want to cross that bridge between
nations, to cross to a new and more promising world, we should
not, in our haste, abandon the path that brought us to this
moment.
First, as Americans have always done, our foremost goal is
to. prevent another world war. To do so, we will still need what
the people in the Pentagon call a forward defense. Let me tell
you what a forward defense means. America spans a continent, but
in strategic terms, we are an island nation. And an island
nation must defend itself before a threat can reach its shores.
And that is why we will continue to have a forward presence --
fighting forces\ and American troops\\ with global reach.
Second, we will, of course, continue to reduce the
likelihood of a nuclear war. And that is why I will aggressively
pursue Strategic Arms Reduction Talks with the Soviet Union.
But arms control and strategic modernization are not competing
strategies. Rather, they can work together to make the world a
safer place.
National
Just this morning, I visited Lawrence Livermore/Labs and met
have contributed 50 much to making
those visionary men and women who strive to make an all out
survivable, cost effective, stratogic defense are defense against
nuclear strike on our country, or a limited strike from a madman
agressors and madmen alite -- a reality. Altrough we seldom hear that
even more unlikely than it is today. Of course, some complain of
anymore that stantegic defense is beyond the grass of our te chrolosy, many still quest
the cost of developing such technologies. They should first
consider the cost of not doing all we can to protect the cities
continue working hand
and citizens of America. That is why I will seek to persuade the
But they should also see that developments such as
Those saw today could bring strategic defenses
well within our budgetary constraints, because
19115 semith SDI has declined stendily in cost and
unlike many programs we are pursuing to Inhance
Genera, every. if over
ongoing
7
in
or
work with us to
Soviets, through our Defense and Space talks to use SDI to help
transition to greater reliame on defenses than offenses in our strategic
NS all make a transition to safer world
face posteining.
Let me now tell you the ways in which our 1991 defense
strategy is a dramatic departure from the military strategies of
the past.
First, new threats are emerging outside the traditional
East-West antagonism of the past 45 years. Ever since the
Mayaguez incident, most conflicts involving U.S. forces -- like
our actions in Libya or Panama -- have had nothing to do with
Soviet expansionism. Nowhere was this more apparent than in the
Persian Gulf two years ago, where only the U.S. Navy could secure
the flow of oil to the industrial democracies.
Even worse, there are 15 countries in the world that are
developing ballistic missile technology many with chemical and
and nuclear
or the capability to produce them.
biological weapons Despite our best efforts, nuclear weapons
are proliferating. And inevitably high-tech weapons will fall
into the hands of leaders whose hatred of America is well known.
We must be ready.
Then there are the narco-gangsters -- already a threat to
our national health and spirit. Now they are taking on the
dimensions of a geopolitical force. And they must be dealt with
as such -- by our military -- in the air and on the seas. III
Clearly, in the future, we will need to be able to repel a
missile, arrest a drug lord or protect a sealane. We will need
forces adaptable to conditions anywhere in the world. We need
8
will, agility, readiness, sustainability. We will need speed and
stealth.
In short, we must now deter both a global war and limited
conflicts with sophisticated new And for this reason, we
and emerging
doubly need to continue the modernization of our forces. It is
my duty, and mine alone, to commit American fighting men to
combat. And while the security of this nation is on my watch,
the lives of American fighting men won't be traded for dollars.\\
Just yesterday, I visited at the National Training Center at
Fort Irwin, near Barstow, where our fighting forces are preparing
for combat. It was at this very base that we trained many of our
troops who fought with such distinction in Panama. As other
threats emerge on the horizon, we must be ready to fight under
any conditions anywhere in the world.
((You know, I read that Khrushchev once spoke to the
Commonwealth Club from lunch until 11 p.m.\\\ Perhaps he began
his speech with these words: "Let me make just a few brief
observations ) )
So I'll get to my final concern -- how all this change in
our defense budget affects us. at home. Many speak of the peace
dividend. Few discuss the short-term cost of peace. There will
be costs as we cross the bridge to a better future -- for
dislocated industries and workers, for disappointed men and women
in the Armed Services who will return to civilian life, for whole
communities.
9
But America has always been willing to pay the price of
peace. I know that some of the bases that have been proposed for
closure are in this area. So I have come to San Francisco today
to assure you that if a base closes, it doesn't close federal
concern and commitment.
Civilians who are laid off will receive top priority for
placement in other DOD positions. The Homeowner's Assistance
Program will protect military and civilian personnel from falling
real estate prices. And the Office of Economic Adjustment will
work with communities to develop powerful new economic assets,
new ways to use old bases. The Bible speaks of beating swords
into plowshares. We are transforming military runways into
municipal airports; military bases into industrial parks and
community colleges; and missile hangers into factories.
( (NSC Insert))
I have no doubt the American people will support these
measures for a continued strong defense. My travels around
America tell me that. But to have the means to negotiate
reductions and ensure the peace, I will need the support,
cooperation and consultation of Congress.
We can now envision a time when military competition is
past; when all the competitive instincts of modern man will be
diverted to commerce; when the warriors of the future will be
businessmen and women like you, briefcase in hand.
10
You know, I started by joking about the 49ers winning the
Super Bowl during the National Anthem. But I don't care how many
passes Joe Montana completed. He knew better than to rest on his
laurels at the beginning of the fourth quarter. So should we.
If Congress will work with me, then peace itself will be the
greatest dividend of all.
Before us is a bridge to a new and better world. The way is
clear. It's time to cross. Thank you for inviting me to San
Francisco. God bless you, and God bless America.
#
#
#
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
February 5, 1990
MEMORANDUM FOR CHRISS WINSTON
FROM:
JIM PINKERTON
IP by A.F.
SUBJECT:
Commonwealth Club Draft Speech
pg. 2, para. 5, line 4
paid any price, bore any burden
"
The trouble with this famous phrase is that it is
bittersweet -- downright bitter to so many who associate these
words with a national failure of will in Vietnam. As a
substitute, any language about sacrifice will suffice, such as
the following from Churchill's "Give us the tools " speech
(which should be checked if used) : "Neither the sudden shock of
battle, nor the long drawn out trials of vigilance and exertion
[wore] us down."
3,4,1
"
for no sane man or woman is nostalgic for the Cold
War. "
This otherwise unobjectionable line has the great danger of
tempting the media to interpret it as a slap at Deputy Secretary
Eagleburger because of a remark he made last year. This is not
just a question of an Administration official, however. We also
no
don't want to be seen as dismissing the legitimate anti-communism
of some who are worried about a too hasty letting down of our
guard. While we defer to any NSC comments to the contrary, we
urge deleting this line.
4,1,2
:
'winds of change'
"
While we are glad to see Harold Macmillan finally getting
credit for his most famous line, it seems very risky to equate
the British Empire with the Soviet Empire, or, for that matter,
Harold Macmillan, an elected leader of a democratic country and
ally, compared with the leader of the Soviet Union. This is a
very glib, facile comparison.
5,2,1
"I am your Commander-In-Chief. "
This seems a little too chest-beating in tone. We suggest
the more usual "As Commande In Chi ef
8,2,6
"
the lives of American fighting men won't be traded
(more)
2
for dollars. "
This is much too strong and merits either deleting or
substantial toning down. It is not overstating it to say that we
risk here accusations of demagoguery and neo-McCarthyism toward
our opponents who wish to cut defense dollars more than the
Administration does.
8,3,1
"Just yesterday, I visited
Fort Irwin
"
Since this is a repeat of a phrase on the first page, we
suggest adding "As I mentioned
"
9,2,9
"
missile hangers
"
"Hangers" should be "hangars."
10,1,5
"
then peace itself will be the greatest dividend of
all."
A super ending to the speech.
###
Dur challenge is to manage this period of
Transation =
world of today to the world
tomorrow — and sateguard they of
the security and of america in the process
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
February 5, 1990
MEMORANDUM FOR CHRISS WINSTON
Deputy Assistant to the President for
Communications
FROM:
BRENT O. HATCH B/A
Associate Counsel to the President
SUBJECT:
Presidential Remarks - ---- Commonwealth Club
Counsel's office has reviewed the above-referenced Presidential
remarks. We have no legal objections.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this matter.
CC: James W. Cicconi
90 FEB 5 P5:03
Document No. 110556SS
WHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORANDUM
DATE:
2/5/90
ACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BY:
2/5/90 4:00 PM
SUBJECT:
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: COMMONWEALTH CLUB
ACTION FYI
ACTION FYI
VICE PRESIDENT
MCCLURE
SUNUNU
NEWMAN
SCOWCROFT
PORTER
DARMAN
ROGICH
BATES
UNTERMEYER
CARD
ROGERS
CICCONI
WINSTON
DEMAREST
PINKERTON
FITZWATER
GRAY
HAGIN
REMARKS:
Please forward any comments directly to Chriss Winston, Rm. 122,
x2930, no later than 4:00 PM TODAY, Monday, February 5, with a
copy to my office. Thank you.
RESPONSE:
James W. Cicconi
Assistant to the President
and Deputy to the Chief of Staff
Ext. 2702
Davis/Martin
January 29, 1990
1990 FEB -5 PM 12: 15
Title: SF
Draft: Three
PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS:
COMMONWEALTH CLUB, SAN FRANCISCO
Noon, Wednesday, February 7th, 1990
( (Acknowledgements to come.))
(A few minutes ago, I asked a 49er fan what he thought was
the turning point in the Super Bowl. He said "the National
Anthem. "))\\\
((Of course, not all recent memories in the Bay Area have
been pleasant ones. I'm sure you remember the last time I was
here, after this city suffered a tragedy and found renewal. I
remember a clutter of car wrecks, collapsed buildings, flattened
freeways 11 and a terrible black cloud rising from the Marina
District. Some damage remains. But today I've seen something
else -- the people of the Bay Area have stood up, dusted
themselves off and rebuilt. The devastation and danger are past.
Because you came together, San Francisco is as beautiful as
ever\ -- San Francisco is back.))\\\
I have come back to California for another reason, to give
you -- no-nonsense, hardnosed businessmen and women that you are
-- a straightforward, but hopeful, message about our national
security. Yesterday, at Fort Irwin, I also thanked our men and
women in uniform -- not just because they keep America safe and
2
free. I came to thank them because they help to make possible
the wonderful changes that are sweeping the world.
And as the threats to American security change, so too must
our defense strategy. In 1986, defense expenditures consumed 6.5
percent of our Gross National Product. As you know, I just
submitted my 1991 budget to Congress, which cuts defense for the
fifth year in a row -- to almost 5 percent of GNP.
I am submitting this budget at a time when the postwar world
we know -- the world that began in 1945 -- is changing before our
very eyes. So to understand where we are going, let me first
review where we have been and where we are today.
The first generation of postwar leaders had the cautionary
example of their predecessors. They remembered that visionary
statesmen, after the First World War, had outlawed large navies.
They remembered that their predecessors had even outlawed war
itself. But no pact prevented World War Two.
So by 1945 our leaders had acquired a patience,
a
pragmatism, \\ born of a sober appraisal of the world as it was.
And from Harry Truman, to John F. Kennedy, to Ronald Reagan, we
paid any price, we bore any burden, in the defense of liberty.
We paid with part of our national wealth. And many brave
Americans paid with their very lives.
Yet over the past 40 years, our leaders continued to seek
peace even as they provided for war. It was during the Truman
Administration, in this very city, that men and women of great
vision and high ideals came from around the world to create a
3
parliament of nations. And so it was in San Francisco, 45 years
ago, that the United Nations was born.
Then, as now, the United States strove to balance its role
as peace-keeper with that of peace-maker. We helped create the
United Nations and NATO; we encouraged Soviet reform even as we
rebuffed Soviet expansion.
Those who crafted this new policy, and called it
containment, predicted that if we blocked the easy path of
expansion, then the Soviet Union would one day have to confront
its inhumane, illogical system. The purpose of this
confrontation was not to defeat or to humiliate the Soviets. The
purpose was to lead to a "mellowing of the Soviet Union." It
took a half a century to vindicate this strategy, and at long
last we can say it works: And that is why the Cold War today is
in retreat.
That is good news, for no sane man or woman is nostalgic for
the Cold War. We are inspired by the Revolution of '89 --
delighted to see a man of letters and conscience in Prague move
from prison to the presidential palace. We are heartened to see
the Berlin Wall fall, setting off a shockwave that upended a
tyrant in Romania.
And we are grateful for something more. The likelihood of a
war with the Soviets has always been small, because of our
strength and that of our Allies. Now, thanks to the courageous
reforms of a dynamic Soviet leader, the threat of war is smaller
than ever before. Like Harold MacMillian before him,
4
President Gorbachev freely acknowledges that empire is a burden,
more problem than protection. And so now "the winds of change"
are shaping a new destiny for the nations of the Continent --
that of a Europe whole and free.
We are taking the first steps across a bridge begun by
others long ago. It is a bridge that can lead us from seemingly
endless conflict to the promise of a lasting peace. But no
matter how great the promise, a bridge between nations must be
reinforced with realism.
As President, I receive a briefing every morning from the
Central Intelligence Agency. And I get from the CIA the best
intelligence available to any world leader today. Yet I often
find that the events reported to me by the CIA in the morning are
overcome by the news in the evening. The world is simply moving
too fast for any person or organization to forecast what will
happen next. With so much that is unpredictable, the promising
future we seek must be weighed against the realities of today.
My most recent proposal, warmly received by President
Gorbachev, was to reduce land forces on both sides in Central
Europe to 195,000 troops. That's the prospect for change, and it
holds great promise.
But the reality? -- The Soviets still have almost 600,000
men under arms in Central Europe today.
Another example: Because of the new openness in Moscow, we
hope to slash the number of strategic weapons on both sides to
5
6,000. That's the prospect for change, and it too holds great
promise.
But the reality? -- the Soviets still have ((number))
strategic weapons. And they are still developing, at a furious
pace, two new mobile strategic weapons systems and a strategic
defense initiative.
I am your Commander-in-Chief. I am bound by the
Constitution to defend and protect the United States of America.
And I cannot, as some would have me do, predicate our defense on
promising, but as of yet unfulfilled, hopes for the future. Our
national defense strategy must not be a response to the professed
intentions of other nations, but to the weapons they hold in
their hands. 11 That's the reality we face.
You certainly don't do business on the basis of a promise.
The banks you do business with expect collateral. And I will
seek from the Soviets the collateral to implement a new peace.
In international terms, collateral means: soldiers
decommissioned, tanks dismantled, and nuclear missiles
demolished.
Some see our measured approach as endangering the process of
change. I see our approach as essential to change, as the only
way to a lasting peace. We have shown that American resolve
leads to Soviet reform. We have shown that American strength is
the catalyst for arms control. We are all excited by change in
the East, but we must not let impatience, born of euphoria, ruin
all we have achieved.
6
No matter how urgently we want to cross that bridge between
nations, to cross to a new and more promising world, we should
not, in our haste, abandon the path that brought us to this
moment.
First, as Americans have always done, our foremost goal is
to prevent another world war. To do so, we will still need what
the people in the Pentagon call a forward defense. Let me tell
you what a forward defense means. America spans a continent, but
in strategic terms, we are an island nation. And an island
nation must defend itself before a threat can reach its shores.
And that is why we will continue to have a forward presence --
fighting forces\\ and American troops\\ with global reach.
Second, we will, of course, continue to reduce the
likelihood of a nuclear war. And that is why I will aggressively
pursue Strategic Arms Reduction Talks with the Soviet Union.
But arms control and strategic modernization are not competing
strategies. Rather, they can work together to make the world a
safer place.
Just this morning, I visited Lawrence Livermore Labs and met
those visionary men and women who strive to make an all-out
nuclear strike on our country, or a limited strike from a madman,
even more unlikely than it is today. Of course, some complain of
the cost of developing such technologies. They should first
consider the cost of not doing all we can to protect the cities
and citizens of America. That is why I will seek to persuade the
7
Soviets, through our Defense and Space talks, to use SDI to help
us all make a transition to safer world.
Let me now tell you the ways in which our 1991 defense
strategy is a dramatic departure from the military strategies of
the past.
First, new threats are emerging outside the traditional
East-West antagonism of the past 45 years. Ever since the
Mayaguez incident, most conflicts involving U.S. forces -- like
our actions in Libya or Panama -- have had nothing to do with
Soviet expansionism. Nowhere was this more apparent than in the
Persian Gulf two years ago, where only the U.S. Navy could secure
the flow of oil to the industrial democracies.
Even worse, there are 15 countries in the world that are
developing ballistic missile technology, many with chemical and
biological weapons. Despite our best efforts, nuclear weapons
are proliferating. And inevitably high-tech weapons will fall
into the hands of leaders whose hatred of America is well known.
We must be ready.
Then there are the narco-gangsters -- already a threat to
our national health and spirit. Now they are taking on the
dimensions of a geopolitical force. And they must be dealt with
as such -- by our military -- in the air and on the seas.\\\
Clearly, in the future, we will need to be able to repel a
missile, arrest a drug lord or protect a sealane. We will need
forces adaptable to conditions anywhere in the world. We need
8
will agility, readiness, sustainability. We will need speed and
stealth.
In short, we must now deter both a global war and limited
conflicts with sophisticated new powers. And for this reason, we
doubly need to continue the modernization of our forces. It is
my duty, and mine alone, to commit American fighting men to
combat. And while the security of this nation is on my watch,
the lives of American fighting men won't be traded for dollars.\
Just yesterday, I visited at the National Training Center at
Fort Irwin, near Barstow, where our fighting forces are preparing
for combat. It was at this very base that we trained many of our
troops who fought with such distinction in Panama. As other
threats emerge on the horizon, we must be ready to fight under
any conditions anywhere in the world.
((You know, I read that Khrushchev once spoke to the
Commonwealth Club from lunch until 11 p.m.\\\ Perhaps he began
his speech with these words: "Let me make just a few brief
observations ) )
So I'll get to my final concern -- how all this change in
our defense budget affects us at home. Many speak of the peace
dividend. Few discuss the short-term cost of peace. There will
be costs as we cross the bridge to a better future -- for
dislocated industries and workers, for disappointed men and women
in the Armed Services who will return to civilian life, for whole
communities.
9
But America has always been willing to pay the price of
peace. I know that some of the bases that have been proposed for
closure are in this area. So I have come to San Francisco today
to assure you that if a base closes, it doesn't close federal
concern and commitment. 11
Civilians who are laid off will receive top priority for
placement in other DOD positions. The Homeowner's Assistance
Program will protect military and civilian personnel from falling
real estate prices. And the Office of Economic Adjustment will
work with communities to develop powerful new economic assets,
new ways to use old bases. The Bible speaks of beating swords
into plowshares. We are transforming military runways into
municipal airports; military bases into industrial parks and
community colleges; and missile hangers into factories.
( (NSC Insert))
I have no doubt the American people will support these
measures for a continued strong defense. My travels around
America tell me that. But to have the means to negotiate
reductions and ensure the peace, I will need the support,
cooperation and consultation of Congress.
We can now envision a time when military competition is
past; when all the competitive instincts of modern man will be
diverted to commerce; when the warriors of the future will be
businessmen and women like you, briefcase in hand.
10
You know, I started by joking about the 49ers winning the
Super Bowl during the National Anthem. But I don't care how many
passes Joe Montana completed. He knew better than to rest on his
laurels at the beginning of the fourth quarter. So should we.
If Congress will work with me, then peace itself will be the
greatest dividend of all.\\\
Before us is a bridge to a new and better world. The way is
clear. It's time to cross. Thank you for inviting me to San
Francisco. God bless you, and God bless America.
#
#
#
PRESIDENT THE OF THE OFFICE UNITED OFFICE ONE HAME STRIET
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20503
NOTICE:
Enclosed are comments from staff members of the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB). Such comments do not necessarily
represent the official position of the Director of OMB or of the
Office of Management and Budget. If you wish to have the
Director's personal comments, please let me know -- and contact
me if you have any questions.
David J. Haun
Executive Assistant
to the Director
18 : Pd S 833 06
Document No. 110556SS
WHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORANDUM
DATE:
2/5/90
ACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BY:
2/5/90 4:00 PM
SUBJECT:
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: COMMONWEALTH CLUB
ACTION FYI
ACTION FYI
VICE PRESIDENT
MCCLURE
SUNUNU
NEWMAN
SCOWCROFT
PORTER
DARMAN
ROGICH
BATES
UNTERMEYER
CARD
ROGERS
CICCONI
WINSTON
DEMAREST
PINKERTON
FITZWATER
GRAY
HAGIN
REMARKS:
Please forward any comments directly to Chriss Winston, Rm. 122,
x2930, no later than 4:00 PM TODAY, Monday, February 5, with a
copy to my office. Thank you.
RESPONSE: See comments
James W. Cicconi
Assistant to the President
and Deputy to the Chief of Staff
Ext. 2702
Davis/Martin
January 29, 1990
Title: SF
1990 FEB -5 PM 12: 15
Draft: Three
PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: COMMONWEALTH CLUB, SAN FRANCISCO
Noon, Wednesday, February 7th, 1990
( (Acknowledgements to come.) )
moll
x3060
( (A few minutes ago, I asked a 49ers fan what he thought was
the turning point in the Super Bowl. He said "the National
Anthem. "))\\\
( (Of course, not all recent memories in the Bay Area have
been pleasant ones. I'm sure you remember the last time I was
mollin
here, after this city suffered a tragedy and found renewal. I
X3060
remember a clutter of car wrecks, collapsed buildings, flattened
freeways\\ and a terrible black cloud rising from the Marina
District. Some damage remains. But today I've seen something
else -- the people of the Bay Area have stood up, dusted
themselves off and rebuilt. The devastation and danger are past.
Because you came together, San Francisco is as beautiful as
ever) -- San Francisco is back. ) )
I have come back to California for another reason, to give
Mollin
you -- no-nonsense, hardnosed businessmen and women that you are
x3060
and
-- a straightforward but hopeful message about our national
security. Yesterday, at Fort Irwin, I also thanked our men and
women in uniform -- not just because they keep America safe and
2
free. I came to thank them because they help to make possible
the wonderful changes that are sweeping the world.
And as the threats to American security change, so too must
our defense strategy. In 1986, defense expenditures consumed 6.5
percent of our Gross National Product. As you know, I just
submitted my 1991 budget to Congress, which cuts defense for the
fifth year in a row -- to almost 5 percent of GNP.
I am submitting this budget at a time when the postwar world
Moley
have
we known the world that began in 1945 -- is changing before our
43060
very eyes. So to understand where we are going, let me first
review where we have been and where we are today.
The first generation of postwar leaders had the cautionary
example of their predecessors. They remembered that visionary
statesmen, after the First World War, had outlawed large navies.
They remembered that their predecessors had even outlawed war
itself. But no pact prevented World War Two.
So by 1945 our leaders had acquired a patience, a
pragmatism, 11 born of a sober appraisal of the world as it was.
And from Harry Truman, to John F. Kennedy, to Ronald Reagan, we
paid any price, we bore any burden, in the defense of liberty.
We paid with part of our national wealth. And many brave
Americans paid with their very lives.
Yet over the past 40 years, our leaders continued to seek
peace even as they provided for war. It was during the Truman
Administration, in this very city, that men and women of great
vision and high ideals came from around the world to create a
3
parliament of nations. And so it was in San Francisco, 45 years
ago, that the United Nations was born.
Then, as now, the United States strove to balance its role
as peace-keeper with that of peace-maker. We helped create the
United Nations and NATO; we encouraged Soviet reform even as we
Mollin
rebuffed Soviet expansion.
X3060
Those who crafted this new policy, and called it
containment, predicted that if we blocked the easy path of
expansion, then the Soviet Union would one day have to confront
its inhumane, illogical system. The purpose of this
policy
more X3060
confrontation was not to defeat or to humiliate the Soviets. The
purpose was to lead to a "mellowing of the Soviet Union." It
achieve
purpose but now
took a half a century to vindicate this strategy and at long
last we can say it works: And that is why the Cold War today is
in retreat.
That is good news, for no sane man or woman is nostalgic for
the Cold War. We are inspired by the Revolution of '89 --
delighted to see a man of letters and conscience in Prague move
from prison to the presidential palace. We are heartened to see
overthrew
Mollin
the Berlin Wall fall, setting off a shockwave that upended a
X3060
tyrant in Romania.
And we are grateful for something more. The likelihood of a
war with the Soviets has always been small, because of our
strength and that of our Allies. Now, thanks to the courageous
reforms of a dynamic Soviet leader, the threat of war is smaller
than ever before. Like Harold MacMillian before him,
4
President Gorbachev freely acknowledges that empire is a burden,
more problem than protection. And so now "the winds of change"
are shaping a new destiny for the nations of the Continent --
that of a Europe whole and free.
Mollin
X3060
We are taking the first steps across a bridge begun by
others long ago. It is a bridge that can lead us from seemingly
endless conflict to the promise of a lasting peace. But no
that
matter how great the promise, a bridge between nations must be
reinforced with realism.
As President, I receive a briefing every morning from the
Central Intelligence Agency. And I get from the CIA the best
intelligence available to any world leader today. Yet I often
find that the events reported to me by the CIA in the morning are
overcome by the news in the evening. The world is simply moving
too fast for any person or organization to forecast what will
happen next. With so much that is unpredictable, the promising
future we seek must be weighed against the realities of today.
My most recent proposal, warmly received by President
Gorbachev, was to reduce land forces on both sides in Central
Europe to 195,000 troops. That's the prospect for change, and it
holds great promise.
But the reality? -- The Soviets still have almost 600,000
men under arms in Central Europe today.
Another example: Because of the new openness in Moscow, we
hope to slash the number of strategic weapons on both sides to
5
6,000. That's the prospect for change, and it too holds great
promise.
But the reality? -- the Soviets still have ( (number))
Moneson
strategic weapons. And they are still developing, deploying at a furious
rafid
pace, two new mobile strategic weapons systems and/a developing strategic
defense initiative.
I am your Commander-in-Chief. I am bound by the
Constitution to defend and protect the United States of America.
And I cannot, as some would have me do, predicate our defense on
promising, but as of yet unfulfilled, hopes for the future. Our
national defense strategy must not be a response to the professed
intentions of other nations, but to the weapons they hold in
their hands. That's the reality we face.
just
a
moller
You certainly don't do business on the basis of a promise.
X3060
The banks you do business with expect collateral. And I will
seek from the Soviets the collateral to implement a new peace.
In international terms, collateral means: soldiers
decommissioned, tanks dismantled, and nuclear missiles
demolished.
Some see our measured approach as endangering the process of
change. I see our approach as essential to change, as the only
way to a lasting peace. We have shown that American resolve
leads to Soviet reform. We have shown that American strength is
the catalyst for arms control. We are all excited by change in
the East, but we must not let impatience, born of euphoria, ruin
all we have achieved.
6
No matter how urgently we want to cross that bridge between
better
Moll
nations, to cross to a new and more promising world, we should
X3060
not, in our haste, abandon the path that brought us to this
point
moment
First, as Americans have always done, our foremost goal is
mole
*3060
to prevent another world war. To do so, we will still need what
the people in the Pentagon call a forward defense. Let me tell
as it has
always been
Molls
143.60
you what a forward defense means. America spans a continent, but for
America
An ?
} 3
in strategic terms, we are an island nation. And an island
nation must defend itself before a threat can reach its shores.
Sureey with and island below marrica not Hatsn and - the
And that is why we will continue to have a forward presence --
fighting forces\ and American troops\\ with global reach.
Second, we will, of course, continue to reduce the
Sam pay. sene 6
likelihood of a nuclear war. And that is why I will aggressively
pursue Strategic Arms Reduction Talks with the Soviet Union.
But arms control and strategic modernization are not competing
strategies. Rather, they can work together to make the world a
safer place.
Just this morning, I visited Lawrence Livermore Labs and met
those visionary men and women who strive to make an all-out
nuclear strike on our country, or a limited strike from a madman,
even more unlikely than it is today. Of course, some complain of
the cost of developing such technologies. They should first
consider the cost of not doing all we can to protect the cities
and citizens of America. That is why I will seek to persuade the
7
Soviets, through our Defense and Space talks, to use SDI to help
us all make a transition to safer world.
Let me now tell you the ways in which our 1991 defense
strategy is a dramatic departure from the military strategies of
the past.
First, new threats are emerging outside the traditional
East-West antagonism of the past 45 years. Ever since the
Mayaguez incident, most conflicts involving U.S. forces -- like
our actions in Libya or Panama -- have had nothing to do with
Soviet expansionism. Nowhere was this more apparent than in the
Persian Gulf two years ago, where only the U.S. Navy could secure
the flow of oil to the industrial democracies.
Even worse, there are 15 countries in the world that are
developing ballistic missile technology, many with chemical and
biological weapons. Despite our best efforts, nuclear weapons
are proliferating. And inevitably high-tech weapons will fall
into the hands of leaders whose hatred of America is well known.
We must be ready.
Then there are the narco-gangsters -- already a threat to
our national health and spirit. Now they are taking on the
dimensions of a geopolitical force. And they must be dealt with
as such -- by our military -- in the air and on the seas.
Clearly, in the future, we will need to be able to repel a
missile, arrest a drug lord or protect a sealane. We will need
forces adaptable to conditions anywhere in the world. We need
8
meet
will agility, readiness, sustainability. We will need speed and
x3060
stealth.
In short, we must now deter both a global war and limited
conflicts with sophisticated new powers. And for this reason, we
doubly need to continue the modernization of our forces. It is
my duty, and mine alone, to commit American fighting men to
combat. And while the security of this nation is on my watch,
the lives of American fighting men won't be traded for dollars.
Just yesterday, I visited at the National Training Center at
Fort Irwin, near Barstow, where our fighting forces are preparing
for combat. It was at this very base that we trained many of our
troops who fought with such distinction in Panama. As other
threats emerge on the horizon, we must be ready to fight under
any conditions anywhere in the world.
( (You know, I read that Khrushchev once spoke to the
Commonwealth Club from lunch until 11 p.m.\\\ Perhaps he began
his speech with these words: "Let me make just a few brief
observations ))\\\
So I'll get to my final concern -- how all this change in
our defense budget affects us at home. Many speak of the peace
dividend. Few discuss the short-term cost of peace. There will
be costs as we cross the bridge to a better future -- for
dedicated
dislocated industries and workers, for disappointed men and women
beforced
Mean
in the Armed Services who will return to civilian life, for whole
X3060
communities.
9
But America has always been willing to pay the price of
peace. I know that some of the bases that have been proposed for
closure are in this area. So I have come to San Francisco today
to assure you that if a base closes, it doesn't close federal
concern and commitment. 11
Civilians who are laid off will receive top priority for
placement in other DOD positions. The Homeowner's Assistance
Program will protect military and civilian personnel from falling
real estate prices. And the Office of Economic Adjustment will
work with communities to develop powerful new economic assets,
new ways to use old bases. The Bible speaks of beating swords
into plowshares. We are transforming military runways into
municipal airports; military bases into industrial parks and
community colleges; and missile hangers into factories.
( (NSC Insert))
know
molen
I have no doubt the American people will support these
X3060
measures for a continued strong defense. My travels around
America tell me that. But to have the means to negotiate
reductions and ensure the peace, I will need the support,
cooperation and consultation of Congress.
We can now envision a time when military competition is
past; when all the competitive instincts of modern man will be
diverted to commerce; when the warriors of the future will be
businessmen and women like you, briefcase in hand.
10
You know, I started by joking about the 49ers winning the
Super Bowl during the National Anthem. But I don't care how many
passes Joe Montana completed. He knew better than to rest on his
laurels at the beginning of the fourth quarter. So should we.
If Congress will work with me, then peace itself will be the
greatest dividend of all.
Before us is a bridge to a new and better world. The way is
clear. It's time to cross. Thank you for inviting me to San
Francisco. God bless you, and God bless America.
#
#
#
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 2- 5-90 ; 6:40PM ;
2024562397-
2024566218;# 1
Document No. 110556SS
WHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORANDUM
DATE:
2/5/90
ACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BY:
2/5/90 4:00 PM
SUBJECT:
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: COMMONWEALTH CLUB
ACTION FYI
ACTION FYI
VICE PRESIDENT
MCCLURE
SUNUNU
NEWMAN
SCOWCROFT
PORTER
DARMAN
ROGICH
BATES
UNTERMEYER
CARD
ROGERS
CICCONI
WINSTON
DEMAREST
PINKERTON
FITZWATER
GRAY
HAGIN
REMARKS:
Please forward any comments directly to Chriss Winston, Rm. 122,
x2930, no later than 4:00 PM TODAY, Monday, February 5, with a
copy to my office. Thank you.
RESPONSE:
All 25 from
Shake changes 06
James W. Cicconi
Assistant to the President
and Deputy to the Chief of Staff
Ext. 2702
2024562397-
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 2- 5-90 state ; 6:41PM ;
Davidson 20245662181# 2
3
lynnett-3490
parliament of nations. And so it was in San Francisco, 45 years
ago, that the United Nations was born.
Then, as now, the United States strove to balance its role
as peace-keeper with that of peace-maker. We helped create the
United Nations and NATO; we encouraged Soviet reform even as we
rebuffed Soviet expansion.
Those who crafted this new policy, and called it
containment, predicted that if we blocked the easy path of
expansion, then the Soviet Union would one day have to confront
its inhumane, illogical system. The purpose of this
confrontation was not to defeat or to humiliate the Soviets. The
purpose was to lead to a "mellowing of the Soviet Union." It
took a half a century to vindicate this strategy, and at long
last we can say it works: And that is why the Cold War today is
in retreat. III
That is good news, for no sane man or woman is nostalgic for
the Cold War. We are inspired by the Revolution of '89 --
delighted to see a man of letters and conscience in Prague move
from prison to the presidential palace. We are heartened to see
the Berlin Wall fall, setting off & shockwave that upended a
tyrant in Romania.
And we are grateful for something more. The likelihood of a
war with the Soviets has always been small, because of our
strength and that of our Allies. Now, thanks to the courageous
reforms of a dynamic Soviet leader, the threat of var is smaller
than ever before. Like Harold MacMillian before him,
Weelihood we were so Persible that we have
But the consequences of even that small
done all that is in our power to defend against it.
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 2- 5-90 ; 6:41PM ;
2024562397->
2024566218:# 3
4
President Gorbachev freely acknowledges that empire is a burden,
more problem than protection. And so now "the winds of change"
are shaping a new destiny for the nations of the Continent --
that of a Europe whole and free.
We are taking the first steps across a bridge begun by
others long ago. It is a bridge that can lead us from seemingly
endless conflict to the promise of a lasting peace. But no
matter how great the promise, a bridge between nations must be
reinforced with realism.
As President, I receive a briefing every morning from the
Central Intelligence Agency. And I get from the CIA the best
intelligence available to any world leader today. Yet I often
find that the events reported to me by the CIA in the morning are
overcome by the news in the evening. The world is simply moving
too fast for any person or organization to forecast what will
happen next. With so much that is unpredictable, the promising
future we seek must be weighed against
realities
My most recent proposal, warmly received by President
Gorbachev, was to reduce land forces on both sides in Central
Europe to 195,000 troops. That's the prospect for change, and it
holds great promise.
But the reality? -- The Soviets still have almost 600,000
men under arms in Central Europe today.
Another example: Because of the new openness in Moscow, we
hope to slash the number of strategic weapons on both sides to
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 2- 5-90 ; 6:42PM ;
2024562397->
2024566218:# 4
5
6,000. That's the prospect for change, and it too holds great
promise.
But the reality? -- the Soviets still have ((number))
strategic weapons. And they are still developing, at a furious
pace, two new mobile strategic weapons systems and a strategic
defense initiative.
I am your Commander-in-Chief. I am bound by the
Constitution to defend and protect the United States of America.
And I cannot, as some would have me do, predicate our defense on
promising, but as of yet unfulfilled, hopes for the future. Our
national defense strategy must not be a response to the professed
intentions of other nations, but to the weapons they hold in
their hands. That's the reality we face.
You certainly don't do business on the basis of a promise.
The banks you do business with expect collateral. And I will
seek from the Soviets the collateral to implement a new peace.
sovier
In international terms, collateral means: Soldiers
decommissioned, tanks dismantled, and nuclear missiles
demolished.
Some see our measured approach as endangering the process of
change. I see our approach as essential to change, as the only
way to a lasting peace. We have shown that American resolve
leads to Soviet reform. We have shown that American strength is
the catalyst for arms control. We are all excited by change in
the East, but we must not let impatience, born of euphoria, ruin
all we have achieved.
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 2- 5-90 ; 6:42PM ;
2024562397-
2024566218;# 5
No matter how urgently we want to cross that bridge between
nations, to cross to a new and more promising world, we should
not, in our haste, abandon the path that brought us to this
moment.
First, as Americans have always done, our foremost goal is
to prevent another world war. To do so, we will still need what
the people in the Pentagon call a forward defense. Let me tell
you what a forward defense means. America spans a continent, but
in strategic terms, we are an island nation. And an island
nation must defend itself before a threat can reach its shores.
And that is why we will continue to have a forward presence -
fighting forces\\ and American troops\\ with global reach.
Second, we will, of course, continue to reduce the
likelihood of a nuclear war. And that is why I will aggressively
pursus Strategic Arms Reduction Talks with the Soviet Union.
But arms control and strategic modernization are not competing
strategies. Rather, they can work together to make the world a
safer place.
Just this morning, I visited Lawrence Livermore Labs and met
those visionary men and women who strive to make an all-out
nuclear strike on our country, or a limited strike from a madman,
even more unlikely than it is today. of course, some complain of
the cost of developing such technologies. They should first
consider the cost of not doing all we can to protect
America. That is why I will seek to persuade the
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 2- 5-90 ; 6:43PM ;
2024562397-
2024566218;# 6
7
Soviets, through our Defense and Space talks, to use SDI to help
us all make a transition to safer world.
Let me now tell you the ways in which our 1991 defense
strategy is a dramatic departure from the military strategies of
the past.
First, new threats are emerging outside the traditional
East-West antagonism of the past 45 years. Ever since the
Mayagues incident, most conflicts involving U.S. forces -- like
our actions in Libya or Panama -- have had nothing to do with
Soviet expansionism. Nowhere was this more apparent than in the
took the lead of other
Persian Gulf two years ago, where
the U.S. Navy
secure
the flow of oil to the industrial democracies.
nations
CANCERNED
Even worse, there are 15 countries in the world that are
to
developing ballistic missile technology, many with chemical and
biological weapons. Despite our best efforts, nuclear weapons
are proliferating. And inevitably high-tech weapons will fall
into the hands of leaders whose hatred of America is well known.
We must be ready.\\
and contempforcivilizednoms
Then there are the narco-gangsters -- already a threat to
our national health and spirit. Now they are taking on the
dimensions of a geopolitical force. And they must be dealt with
as such -- by our military -- in the air and on the seas.\\\ seas.
Clearly, in the future, we will need to be able to repel a
missile, arrest a drug lord or protect a sealane. We will need
forces adaptable to conditions anywhere in the world. We need
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 2- 5-90 ; 6:43PM ;
2024562397-
2024566218;# 7
will agility, readiness, sustainability. We will need speed and
stealth.
In short, we must now deter both a global war and limited
conflicts withVsophisticated new And reason, we
irrepormble powers wielding terrible for this weapons
doubly need to continue the modernization of our forces. It is
my duty, and mine alone, to commit American fighting men to
combat. And while the security of this nation is on my watch,
the lives of American fighting men wen't be traded for dollars.\\
Just yesterday, I visited at the National Training Center at
Fort Irwin, near Barstow, where our fighting forces are preparing
for combat. It was at this very base that we trained many of our
troops who fought with such distinction in Panama. As other
threats emerge on the horison, we must be ready to fight under
any conditions anywhere in the world.\\
((You know, I read that Khrushchev once spoke to the
Commonwealth Club from lunch until 11 p.m.\\\ Perhaps he began
his speech with these words: "Let me make just a few brief
observations )
so I'll get to my final concern -- how all this change in
our defense budget affects us at home. Many speak of the peace
dividend. Few discuss the short-term cost of peace. There will
be costs as we cross the bridge to a better future -- for
dislocated industries and workers, for disappointed men and women
in the Armed Services who will return to civilian life, for whole
communities.
Document No. 110556SS
WHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORA
0913
DATE:
2/5/90
ACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BY:
2/5/90 4:00 PM
SUBJECT:
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: COMMONWEALTH CLUB
ACTION FYI
ACTION FYI
VICE PRESIDENT
MCCLURE
SUNUNU
NEWMAN
SCOWCROFT
PORTER
DARMAN
ROGICH
BATES
UNTERMEYER
CARD
ROGERS
CICCONI
WINSTON
DEMAREST
PINKERTON
FITZWATER
GRAY
HAGIN
REMARKS:
Please forward any comments directly to Chriss Winston, Rm. 122,
x2930, no later than 4:00 PM TODAY, Monday, February 5, with a
copy to my office. Thank you.
RESPONSE:
TO: CHRISS WINSTON
NSC clears the Presidential remarks for the Commonwealth Club with
changes as marked.
Brent Scowcroft
James W. Cicconi
CC: James W. Cicconi
Assistant to the President
and Deputy to the Chief of Staff
Ext. 2702
Davis/Martin
January 29, 1990
1990 FEB -5 PM 12: 15
Title: SF
Draft: Three
PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: COMMONWEALTH CLUB, SAN FRANCISCO
Noon, Wednesday, February 7th, 1990
( (Acknowledgements to come. ) )
(A few minutes ago, I asked a 49er fan what he thought was
the turning point in the Super Bowl. He said "the National
Anthem."))\\\
((Of course, not all recent memories in the Bay Area have
been pleasant ones. I'm sure you remember the last time I was
here, after this city suffered a tragedy and found renewal. I
remember a clutter of car wrecks, collapsed buildings, flattened
freeways\ and a terrible black cloud rising from the Marina
District. Some damage remains. But today I've seen something
else -- the people of the Bay Area have stood up, dusted
themselves off and rebuilt. The devastation and danger are past.
Because you came together, San Francisco is as beautiful as
ever\\ -- San Francisco is back. ) )
I have come back to California for another reason, to give
you -- no-nonsense, hardnosed businessmen and women that you are
-- a straightforward, but hopeful, message about our national
security. Yesterday, at Fort Irwin, I also thanked our men and
women in uniform -- not just because they keep America safe and
2
free. I came to thank them because they help to make possible
the wonderful changes that are sweeping the world.
And as the threats to American security change, so too must
our defense strategy. In 1986, defense expenditures consumed 6.5
percent of our Gross National Product. As you know, I just
submitted my 1991 budget to Congress, which cuts defense for the
down just cebove
fifth year in a row to [almost]5 percent of GNP.
I am submitting this budget at a time when the postwar world
we know the world that began in 1945 -- is changing before our
very eyes. So to understand where we are going, let me first
review where we have been and where we are today.
The first generation of postwar leaders had the cautionary
example of their predecessors. They remembered that visionary
tried to limit
Accuracy
statesmen, after the First World War, had Cutlawed large) navies.
They remembered that their predecessors had even outlawed war
itself. But no pact prevented World War Two recelism
prudence?
So by 1945 our leaders had acquired a patience, 11 a
pragmatism, born of a sober appraisal of the world as it was.
Ike?
And from Harry Truman, to John F. Kennedy, to Ronald Reagan, we
Nixm?
Ford?
paid any price, we bore any burden, in the defense of liberty.
We paid with part of our national wealth. And many brave
Americans paid with their very lives.
70 not
antso
provide for war
18c this.
Yet over the past 40 years, our leaders continued to seek
JFK quote
peace even as they provided for war. It was during the Truman
sought peace
Administration, in this very city, that men and women of great
ubris, the
vision and high ideals came from around the world to create a
commonly
cird prelude where to we did vietnam, clearly not price. pay any Use this of here Bush Is Kennedy's comminent. policy. Not
3
parliament of nations. And so it was in San Francisco, 45 years
ago, that the United Nations was born.
Then, as now, the United States strove to balance its role
as peace-keeper with that of peace-maker. We helped create the
change
United Nations and NATO; we encouraged Soviet (reform) even as we
rebuffed Soviet expansion.
Those who crafted this new policy and] called it
and
containment, predicted that if we blocked the easy path of
expansion [then] the Soviet Union would one day have to confront
he contradictions of
its inhumane, illogical system. The purpose of this
n
containment
-
confrontation was not to defeat or to humiliate the Soviets. The
hope was someday to see "the breakup or the gradual mellowing of Smit nower," as George
purpose was to lead to a "mellowing of the Soviet Union-3 It
but
Kennan put
took a half a century to vindicate this strategy, Land] at long
itin1947.
is
inq The Service E impire
do
last we can say it works? And that is why the Cold War today is now
wars
not
in retreat.
retreat
That is good news, for no sane man or woman is nostalgic for
This
the Cold War. We are inspired by the Revolution of '89 --
delighted to see a man of letters and conscience in Prague move
for example,
from prison to the presidential palace.
We Delighted are heartened to see
I
the Berlin Wall fall, setting off a shockwave that upended a
tyrant in Romania.
And we are grateful for something more. The likelihood of a
war with the Soviets has always been small, because of our
march of freedom
strength and that of our Allies. Now, thanks to the courageous
and democracy in Eastern Eumpe and even in the Soviet Union itself prospects
reforms of a dynamic Seviet leader, the threat of war is smaller
for an endorine peace are greater now than ever before,
Macmillan
than ever before Like Marold MacMillian before him,
south British Africa, Empire. comnare not about Innuy the Britishto cafe,
speaking was about
Heisnot No!
4
President Gorbachey freely acknowledges that empire is a burden,
saying
this.
more problem than protection.
And so now the winds of change
are shaping a new destiny for the nations of the Continent --
that of a Europe whole and free. III
We are taking the first steps across a bridge begun by
others long ago. It is a bridge that can lead us from seemingly
endless conflict to the promise of a lasting peace. But no
we must be sure the
matter how great the promise, [a bridge between nations must be
bridge is secure before we venture too far accosit.
reinforced with realism.
As President, I receive anintelligence @ briefing every morning from the
Don't
Central Intelligence Agency. And I get from the CIA the best
imply that
one ofth
C/A is
intelligence available to any world leader today. Yet, often
useless!
that
most striking features of the present day is the uncertainty about the
find that the events reported to me by the CIA in the merning are
form. Events are rushing fast in # positive direction. But there
Rede
Its budget
overcome by the news in the evening. The world is simply moving
hillget
have been Letbacks -as in China - and there are great uncertaintier
lut!
too fast for any person or organisation to forecast what will
that remain in k Saiet Union and Eastern Europ.
Make different a
argursvitat our
happen nexty With so much that is unpredictable, (the) promising
point
begin from
future (ive seek must be weighed against the realities of today.
Allies are
My most recent proposal, warmly received by President
ourallies and by
Tolrupt
important! more
Gorbachev, was to reduce land forces on both sides in Central and Eastern
the troop levels
stationed on foreign soil
Europe to 195,000 troops. That's the prospect for change, and it
holds great promise.
over 560,000
Reh
But the reality? -- The Soviets still have lmost 600,000
men under arms in Central Europe today.
progress in & START negotiations,
Another example: Because of (the new openness in Moseow) we
Rado
reposed Zengan deeprute
hope to slash the number of strategic weapons on both sides (Le in
half.
1982, long
A
before
streacher
used socied as this work if we au mobes it being
5
unrealistic,
(6,000) That's the prospect for change, and it too holds great
promise.
over 10,000
But the reality? the Soviets still have ((number))
5-24+25
modernizing them
/
re not
strategic weapons, And they are (otill developing) at a furious
ring
They have deployed
ICBMS, and are spending on
leveloped;
pace two new mobile @trategic weapons systems and strategic
-y are
alveady
defense (Initiative)
^ at levels com Parable to what they spend on strategic offensive forces.
egloyed
the
I am Gour Commander-in-Chief. I am bound by the
Constitution to defend and protect the United States of America.
And I cannot, as some would have me do, predicate our defense on
promising, but as of yet unfulfilled, hopes for the future. Our
national defense strategy must not be a response to the professed
intentions of other nations, but to the weapons they hold in
their hands. That's the reality we face.
You certainly don't do business on the basis of a promise.
The banks you do business with expect collateral. And I will
seek from the Soviets the collateral to implement a new peace.
In international terms, collateral means: soldiers
discharged,
decommissioned) tanks dismantled, and nuclear missiles
demolished.
Some see our measured approach as endangering the process of
change. I see our approach as essential to change, as the only
way to a lasting peace. We have shown that American resolve
-
leads to Soviet reform. We have shown that American strength is
the catalyst for arms control. We are all excited by change in
the East, but we must not let impatience, born of euphoria, squander @vice
all we have achieved.
6
No matter how urgently we want to cross that bridge between
nations, to cross to a new and more promising world, we should
not, in our haste, abandon the approach path that brought us to this
moment.
Misuse of
First, as Americans have always done, our foremost goal is
"forward term
to maintain
to prevent another world war. To do so, we will still need what
the global balance # power, EVEN with its troops someday pulled back within its
defrase."
the people in the Pentagon call a forward defense. Let me tell
But, there
borders, the Saict Union will remain wirnholmingly preponderant as a military power an
you what a forward defense means. America spans a continent, but
hald be a
th Continent. European ferwity, stability, and freedom and global peace
in strategic terms, we are an island nation. And an island
# here
require an American presence there, And we must remain aslong as we are
on need to
nation must defend itself before a threat can reach its shores
stay in
needed, and wanted.
And that is why we will continue to have a forward presence and whyme
Europe
^
need
fighting forces\\ and American troops\\ with global reach.
our efforts
1
Second, we will, of course, continue to reduce the
likelihood of a nuclear war. And that is why I will aggressively
pursue Strategic Arms Reduction Talks with the Soviet Union.
But arms control and strategic modernization are not competing
strategies. Rather, they can work together to make the world a
safer place.
whether from a necelear
Deeperpower declar or a demented
Just this morning, I visited Lawrence Livermore Labs and met
a
those visionary men and women who strive to make an all-out
nuclear strike on our country, or a limited strike from a madman,
when
even more unlikely than it is today. Of course, some complain of
the cost of developing such technologies, They should first
deter couplict and
consider the cost of not doing all we can to to protect the cities
and citizens of America That is why I will seek to persuade the
If the technology I have seen today proves feasible and it looks very promising-
no war planner cald be confident of t2 success of a ballistic missile attack.
Deterrince would be strengthened.
something about the
strategy 1991 defense behind budget. our
7
discuss how strategic definses CAN
Soviets, through our Defense and Space talks, to Gee SDL to help
strengthin deferrence and lead a
(us all make & transition to safer world.
Let me now tell you the ways in which our 1991 defense
strategy is a from the military strategies of
begins dramatic the departure trapsition
the past.
many challenges remain in the 1-54 of t2 world, Even as th balance in
First, few threats are emerging outside the traditional
European Central Front becomes more secure at Lower levels offorces, contingencies
Overstated.
East West antagonism of the past 45 years. Eyer since the
in the Third World will 10am larger in our defins planning. Remember
will
Mayaguez incident, most conflicts involving U.S. forces like
tempt
th threats from Libyan, Syrian, or Iranian terrorism. our
our actions in Libya or Panama have had nothing to de with
Congress
liberation of Grinada, and Panama. Revrem bir our vital interest
to cut
Seviet expansionism. Nowhere was this more apparent than in the
strategic
was need ed to help
forther in
^
Persian Gulf two years ago where Only the U.S. Navy @ould secure
^
Empe
the flow of oil to the industrial democracies.
Allies
celarmingly, more than E 15 additional
will
here
Even worse, there are countries in the world that are
there
have
by 1 end ofth decade,
too
developing ballistic missile technology) many with chemical and
^
biological too, weapons. (Despite our best efforts Auclear weapons capabilities,
are proliferating. And inevitably high-tech weapons will fall
into the hands of leaders whose hatred of America is well known. werming mus
intensity efforts to prevent This dangerous proliferation. But
We must be ready AR its consequences
Then there are the narco-gangsters -- already a threat to
our national health and spirit. Now they are taking on the
dimensions of a geopolitical force. [And] they must be dealt with
on the land
as such -- by our military -- in the air and on the seas. III
Clearly, in the future, we will need to be able to repel a
missile, arrest a drug lord or protect a sealane. We will need
will
forces adaptable to conditions anywhere in the world. We need
1
sprayistmill not be
8
(Will) agility readiness, sustainability. We will need speed and
stealth.
continue to
In short, we must new deter both a global war and limited
in new conditions.
conflicts (ith sophisticated new powerd And for this reason, we
may
doubly need to continue the modernization of our forces. It
to
by
sad
again
my duty and mine alone to commit American fighting men to
combat. [And] And while the security of this nation is on my watch,
the lives of American fighting men won't be traded for dollars.
Just yesterday, I visited at the National Training Center at
Fort Irwin, near Barstow, where our fighting forces are preparing
je
for combat. It was at this very base that we trained many of our
Lon't
Being prepared is
vant to
troops who fought with such distinction in Panama. As other
irred like and like
also the best way to ensure that wars Are prevented.
veire
threats emerge on the horizon, we must be ready to fight under
mitlies
agerter
any conditions anywhere in the world.\\
ights in
way
hird
((You know, I read that Khrushchev once spoke to the
world
Commonwealth Club from lunch until 11 p.m.\\\ Perhaps he began
his speech with these words: "Let me make just a few brief
observations ))\\\
So I'll get to my final concern -- how all this change in
our defense budget affects us at home. Many speak of the peace
dividend. Few discuss the short-term cost of peace. There will
be costs as we cross the bridge to a better future -- for
My
Therefwill be adjustments.)
dislocated industries and workers for disappointed men and women
relabor
74
in the Armed Services who will return to civilian life, for whole
Connside
communities.
)
much?
may he some
Trim
painful personal adjustments
9
But America has always been willing to pay the price of
peace. A I know that some of the bases that have been proposed for
And experience proves that communities can renew themson and prospir.
closure are in this area. So I have come to San Francisco today
to assure you that if a base closes, it doesn't close federal
concern and commitment.
Civilians who are laid off will receive top priority for
placement in other DOD positions. The Homeowner's Assistance
Program will protect military and civilian personnel from falling
real estate prices. And the Office of Economic Adjustment will
work with communities to develop powerful new economic assets,
new ways to use old bases. The Bible speaks of beating swords
into plowshares. We are transforming military runways into
municipal airports; military bases into industrial parks and
community colleges; and missile hangers into factories.
2
((NSC Insert))
I have no doubt the American people will support these
measures for a continued strong defense. My travels around
America tell me that. But to have the means to negotiate
reductions and ensure the peace, I will need the support,
cooperation and consultation of Congress.
the world is more felure then
We can now envision a time when military competition is
Too
ever; when freedom thrives;
nuch
past^ when all the competitive instincts of modern man will be
- - or football!
diverted to commerce, (hen the warriors of the future will be
3ad
businessmen and women like you, briefcase in hand.
mage!
10
You know, I started by joking about the 49ers winning the
Super Bowl during the National Anthem. But I don't care how many
passes Joe Montana completed. He knew better than to rest on his
laurels at the beginning of the fourth quarter. So should we.
If Congress will work with me, then peace itself will be the
greatest dividend of all.\\\
Before us is a bridge to a new and better world. The way is
clear. It's time to cross. Thank you for inviting me to San
Francisco. God bless you, and God bless America.
#
#
#
NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL
TIME STAMP
EXECUTIVE SECRETARIAT STAFFING DOCUMENT
RECEIVED
SYSTEM LOG NUMBER:
0913
90 FEB 5 05
ACTION OFFICER: RODMAN
DUE: IMMEDIATELY
Prepare Memo For Scowcroft/Gates
Appropriate Action
Prepare Memo For Cicconi
Prepare Memo for Hughes
URGENT
Prepare Memo
SCOWCROFT
to
WINSTON W/ INFO CICCONI
CONCURRENCES/COMMENTS*
PHONE* to action officer at ext.
6907
FYI
FYI
fyi
Basora
Lampley
Rostow
Beers
Levin
Salvetti
Blackwill Concurs
Mahley
Tilley
Charles
Mandel
Tobey concurs
Coulson
Melby convers
Van Eron
Davis
Menan
Watson
Deal
Merchant
Welch
Dorminey
Miller
Whitley
Dyke
Needels
Wilson
Gordon per Hayden
Paal
Working
Grimes
Pacelli
Zelikow
Haass
Passage
FRY concors
Hayden concurs
Pilling
Hutchings
Popadiuk
Jackson
Pryce
Kanter
Rademaker
Kitchen
Rice perBlackwill
LaMagna
Rodman
INFORMATION
Hughes
Sittmann
Exec. Sec. Desk
Scowcroft (advance)
Gates (advance)
Secretariat
COMMENTS
Loaged Bv AC
Return to Secretariat
Document No. 110556SS
WHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORA
0913
DATE:
2/5/90
ACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BY:
2/5/90 4:00 PM
SUBJECT:
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: COMMONWEALTH CLUB
ACTION FYI
ACTION FYI
VICE PRESIDENT
MCCLURE
SUNUNU
NEWMAN
SCOWCROFT
PORTER
and Cicconi
DARMAN in blue
ROGICH
BATES
UNTERMEYER
CARD
ROGERS
CICCONI
WINSTON
DEMAREST
PINKERTON
FITZWATER
GRAY
HAGIN
REMARKS:
Please forward any comments directly to Chriss Winston, Rm. 122,
x2930, no later than 4:00 PM TODAY, Monday, February 5, with a
copy to my office. Thank you.
RESPONSE:
TO: CHRISS WINSTON
NSC clears the Presidential remarks for the Commonwealth Club with
changes as marked.
Brent Scowcroft
James W. Cicconi
CC: James W. Cicconi
Assistant to the President
and Deputy to the Chief of Staff
Ext. 2702
Davis/Martin
January 29, 1990
1990 FEB -5 PM 12: 15
Title: SF
Draft: Three
PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: COMMONWEALTH CLUB, SAN FRANCISCO
Noon, Wednesday, February 7th, 1990
((Acknowledgements to come.) )
( (A few minutes ago, I asked a 49er fan what he thought was
the turning point in the Super Bowl. He said "the National
Anthem. ) )
((Of course, not all recent memories in the Bay Area have
been pleasant ones. I'm sure you remember the last time I was
here, after this city suffered a tragedy and found renewal. I
remember a clutter of car wrecks, collapsed buildings, flattened
freeways\\ and a terrible black cloud rising from the Marina
District. Some damage remains. But today I've seen something
else -- the people of the Bay Area have stood up, dusted
themselves off and rebuilt. The devastation and danger are past.
Because you came together, San Francisco is as beautiful as
ever\\ -- San Francisco is back. ) )
I have come back to California for another reason, to give
you -- no-nonsense, hardnosed businessmen and women that you are
-- a straightforward, but hopeful, message about our national
security. Yesterday, at Fort Irwin, I also thanked our men and
women in uniform -- not just because they keep America safe and
2
free. I came to thank them because they help to make possible
the wonderful changes that are sweeping the world.
And as the threats to American security change, so too must
our defense strategy. In 1986, defense expenditures consumed 6.5
percent of our Gross National Product. As you know, I just
submitted my 1991 budget to Congress, which cuts defense for the
fifth year in a row -- to almost 5 percent of GNP.
I am submitting this budget at a time when the postwar world
we know -- the world that began in 1945 -- is changing before our
very eyes. So to understand where we are going, let me first
review where we have been and where we are today.
The first generation of postwar leaders had the cautionary
They remembered that the Greatwar the was toendall wars
was followed
on a period of
example of their predecessors They remembered that visionary
chaos and
tried to limit
conflict, of
Ac
statesmen, after the First World War, had Cutlawed large) navies
changing
and
They remembered that their predecessors had even outlawed war
and governments michton
But soon great hopes gave way to the dictators. And asgression
policies.
itself But no pact prevent World War Two.
went unchecked
?
pact could
So by 1945 our leaders had acquired MA patience,
a
bloody experience. And we appaaised the world soberly,
pragmatism, born of/la sober appraisal of the world as it was.
our
Ike?
And from Harry Truman, to John F. Kennedy to Ronald Reagan, we
Nixm?
strength became the world's shield, our freedom the world's hope.
Ford?
paid any price, we bore any burden, in the defense of liberty
the price of liberty
And with part our youngest and havest.
We paid with part of our national wealth. And many brave
Americans with lives.
Do not
Coven paid as we maintained their am very military strength, our people also maintained their ideals.
use this.
Yet over the past 40 years our leaders continued to seek
JFK qvote
peace even as they provided for war. It was during the Truman
symbolized $
Administration, in this very city, that men and women of great
jubris,
vision and high ideals came from around the world to create an
M
cird w is viemam,
prelude where to we did clearly not price. pay any Use this of here Bush is Kennedy's open- Not
nice but legislative not right powerire)
3
parliament assembly of nations. And so it was in San Francisco, 45 years
ago, that the United Nations was born.
Then, as now, the United States strove to balance its role
as peace-keeper with that of peace-maker. We helped create the
change
United Nations and NATO; we encouraged Soviet (reform) even as we
rebuffed Soviet expansion.
Those who crafted this new policy, and called it
containment, predicted that if we blocked the easy path of
we
expansion, then the Soviet Union would one day have to confront
he contradictions of
to The preforre purpose likets
its inhumane, illogical system. The purpose of this
^
And
confrontation was not to defeat or to humiliate the Soviets.
The
hope was someday to see "the breakup or the gradual mellowing of Smith nower, as George
Surpose was to lead to a mellowing of the Soviet Union It
^
nearly
but
Kennan put
took a half a century to vindicate this strategy, and at long
itin1947
see the results:
wars
do
last we can say it works: And that is why the Cold War today is
at ebb tide.
not
in retreat
retreat
That is good news, for no sane man or woman is nostalgic for
the Cold War. We are inspired by the Revolution of '89 --
delighted to see a man of letters and conscience in Prague move
from prison to the presidential palace. We are heartened to see
the Berlin Wall fall, setting off a shockwave that upended a
tyrant in Romania.
And we are grateful for something more. The likelihood of a
Now,
war with the Soviets has always been small, because of our
march of freedo
strength and that of our Allies, Now, thanks to the courageous
reforms of a dynamic Seviet leader, the threat of war is smaller
and democracy in Eastern Eumpe and even in the Soviet Union itself prospects
for an endoring place are greater NOW than ever before,
Macmilan
than ever before.\ (Like Marold MacMillian before him,
sam Britth Africa, Empire. not about Innuy British cafe, to
speaking was about
compare the
not No!
4
President Gorbachey freely acknowledges that empire is a burden,
saying
we can
Fink
more problem than protection. And so now the winds of change
envision
are shaping a new destiny for the nations of the Continent --
Truly
that of a Europe whole and free.
We are taking the first steps across a bridge begun by
others long ago. It is a bridge that can lead us from seemingly
endless conflict to the promise of a lasting peace. But no
matter how great the promise, a bridge between nations must be
reinforced with realism.
As President, I receive anintelligence @ briefing every morning from the
receive
Don't
Central Intelligence Agency) And I get from the CIA the best
imply that
one ofth
ClAis
intelligence available to any world leader today. Yet, € often
that
most striking features of the present day is the uncertainty about the
!
find that the events reported to me by the CIA in the morning are
forter. Events are rushing fast in a positive direction But there
lyst
overcome by the news in the evening. The world is cimply moving
minget
have been Letbalks as in China - and there are great uncertainter
lut!
tee fast for any person or organization to forecast what will
that remain in & Saiet Union and Eastern Emp.
Make different a
happen nexty With so much that is unpredictable, the promising
arpursuit Mr
point
begin from
future (we seek must 40 weighed agains the realities of today.
Allies are
My most recent proposal, warmly received by President
ourallies and by
important! more
the troop levels
stationed on foreign soil
Gorbachev, was to reduce land forces on both sides in Central and Eastem
Europe to 195,000 troops. That's the prospect for change, and it
less threatening futine we envision,
holds great promise.
over 560,000
But the reality? -- The Soviets still have lmost 600,000
men under arms in Central Europe today.
progress in & START negotiations,
imposted Zengon deepruts
Another example: Because of (the new openness in Moseow> we
hope to slash the number of strategic weapons on both sides (to in half.
-1987 long
A
be
5
future we envision,
(6,000) That's the prospect for change, and it too holds great
promise.
today,
over 10,000
5-24-25
But the reality? -71 the Soviets still have ((number))
modernizing them
6
in not
strategic weapons, And they are otill developing) at a furious
ring
They have deployed
developed,
ICBMS, and are spending on
pace two new mobile @trategic weapons systems and strategic
-Y are
already
defense Initiative
^ at levels com avable to what they spend m strategic offensive forces
legloyed
as President, 1 I the
am your Commander-in-Chief. I am bound by the
Constitution to defend and protect the United States of America.
And I cannot, as some would have me do, predicate the our defense on
of om people
promising, but as of yet unfulfilled, hopes for the future. Our
national defense strategy must not be a response to the professed future
intentions of other nations, but to the weapons they hold in
their hands 111 today. That 's the is reality. we And face. we must face up to it.
You certainly don't do business on the basis of a promise.
The banks you do business with expect collateral. And I will
seek from the Soviets the collateral to implement a new peace.
In international terms, collateral means: soldiers
discharged,
decommissioned) tanks dismantled, and nuclear missiles
demolished.
essential safety and of this to the Notion,
Some see our measured approach as endangering the process of
change. I see our approach as essential to change, as the only
way to a lasting peace. We have shown that American resolve can helpfmther
leads to Soviet reform. We have shown that American strength is
we have Shown the American ideals can inspire
the catalyst for arms control. 1 are all excited by change in
the East, but we must not let impatience, born of euphoria, squander Cuim
all we have achieved, and all we can achieve.
6
No matter how urgently we want to cross that bridge between
nations, to cross to a new and more promising world, we should
not, in our haste, abandon the path that brought us to this
moment.
andwill
Misuse of
First, as Americans have always done, our foremost goal is
term
to prevent another world war. To do so, we will still need what
to maintain
"forwand
defends."
the global balance # power, Even with its troops someday pulled back within its
the people in the Pentagon call a forward defense. Let me tell
But, there
borders, the SmittUnim will remain wirnholmingly prepondevant as a military power an
you what a forward defense means. America spans continent, but
should be
h Continunt. European ferwity, stability, and freedom and glo
in strategic terms, we are an island nation. And an island
A here
require an American presence there. And we musterimainestay as we Email
on need to
nation must defend itself before a threat can reach its shores
stay in
needed,
And that is why we will continue to have a forward presence
and whyme
Europe
fighting forces\\ and American troops\\ with global reach.
Second, we will, of course, continue to reduce the
likelihood of a nuclear war. And that is why I will aggressively vigoronaly
pursue Strategic Arms Reduction Talks with the Soviet Union.
But arms control and strategic modernization are not competing
strategies. Rather, they can work together to make the world a
safer place.
Just this morning, I visited Lawrence Livermore Labs and met
those visionary men and women who strive to make an all-out
nuclear strike on our country, or a limited strike from a madman,
even more unlikely than it is today. Of course, some complain of
the cost of developing such technologies. They should first
consider the cost of not doing all we can to protect the cities
and citizens of America. That is why I will seek to persuade the
If the technology I have seen today proves feavible and it looks very promising.-
no war planner cald be confident of t2 success of a ballistic. missile attack,
Determance would be strengthemed.
7
discuss how strategic detinses an
Soviets, through our Defense and Space talks, to Goe SDI to help
strengthin deferrence and lead to a
Gs all make & transition to safer world.
Let me now tell you the ways in which our 1991 defense
strategy is a dramatic departure from the military strategies of
the past.
many challenges remain in the 15 of the world, Even as th balance in
First, 6ew threats are emerging outside the traditional
Ourstated.
European Central Front becomes moresecure at Lower levels offorces, contingencies
East West antagonism of the past 45 years. Eyer since the
in the Third World will 10am larger in our definds planning. Remember
will
Mayaguez incident, most conflicts involving U.S. forces like
tempt
th threats from Libyah, Syrian, or Iranian terrarism. Remember on
our actions in Libya or Panama have had nothing to do with
Congress
liberation of Grinada, and Panama. Remem br our vital interest
to cut
Soviet expansionism. Nowhere was this more apparent than in the
in the strategic
was need to help
forther in
Persian Gulf two years ago where only the U.S. Navy @ould secure
^
with um Allie
Emp
the flow of oil to the industrial democracies.
Allies
more than 15 additional
will
wine
Even worse, there are as countries in the world that are
there
have
by 1 end 04th decade
too
developing ballistic missile Sechnology) many with chemical and
^
biological too, weapons. (Despite our best efforts Muclear weapons capabilities,
are proliferating. And inevitably high-tech weapons will fall
into the hands of leaders whose hatred of America is well known. wenir
intensity efforts to prevent This dangrous proliteration. But
We must be ready.
Then there are the narco-gangsters -- already a threat to
and will
our national health and spirit. Now they are taking on the pretensions
dimensions of a geopolitical force. And they must be dealt with
as such -- by our military -- in the air and on the seas. III
Clearly, in the future, we will need to be able to repel a
stop aggression,
missile arrest a drug lord, or
protect a sealane
We will need
will
forces adaptable to conditions anywhere in the world. We need
-
8
(will) agility, readiness, sustainability. We will need speed and
stealth.
continue to
In short, we must DOW deter both a global war and limited
in new conditions.
conflicts 6ith sophisticated new powerd And for this reason, we
may be
doubly need to continue the modernization of our forces. It to,
my duty( and mine alone to commit American fighting men again to
sad
combat. And while the security of this nation is on my watch,
the lives of American fighting men won't be traded for dollars.
Just yesterday, I visited at the National Training Center at
Fort Irwin, near Barstow, where our fighting forces are preparing
we
for combat. It was at this very base that we trained many of our
don't
But Being prepared is
want to
troops who fought with such distinction in Panama. 1 As other
and like
threats emerge on the horizon, we must be ready to fight under
also the best way to ensure that wars are prevented. And I must say say
we
cal
any anywhere in the world.\
that conditions after seeing am boys, talking w/ them, they're up to the challenges of the future.
Sghtsta
Third
((You know, I read that Khrushchev once spoke to the
world
Commonwealth Club from lunch until 11 p.m.\\\ Perhaps he began
his speech with these words: "Let me make just a few brief
observations ))\\\
So I'll get to my final concern -- how all this change in
our defense budget affects us at home. Many speak of the peace
dividend. Few discuss the short-term cost of peace. There will
be costs as we cross the bridge to a better future -- for
My
There will be adjustments.
relabor
dislocated industries and workers for disappointed men and women
74
in the Armed Services who will return to civilian life, for whole
commside
communities.
0
Trim
9
But America has always been willing to pay the price of
peace. A that some of the bases that have been proposed for
And I experience know proves that communities can renew themsions and prospir.
closure are in this area. So I have come to San Francisco today
to assure you that if a base closes, it doesn't close federal
concern and commitment.
Civilians who are laid off will receive top priority for
placement in other DOD positions. The Homeowner's Assistance
Program will protect military and civilian personnel from falling
real estate prices. And the Office of Economic Adjustment will
work with communities to develop powerful new economic assets,
new ways to use old bases. The Bible speaks of beating swords
into plowshares. We are transforming military runways into
municipal airports; military bases into industrial parks and
community colleges; and missile hangers into factories.
2
( (NSC Insert))
I have no doubt the American people will support these
measures for a continued strong defense. My travels around
America tell me that. But to have the means to negotiate
reductions and ensure the peace, I will need the support,
cooperation and consultation of Congress.
ever; when freedom thrives;
We can now envision a time when military competition is
the world is more feiure then
Too
much
past'n when all the competitive instincts of modern man will be
- - or football!
diverted to commerceA Chen the warriors of the future will be
Ba
businessmen and women like you, briefcase in hand
image.
10
You know, I started by joking about the 49ers winning the
Super Bowl during the National Anthem. But I don't care how many
passes Joe Montana completed. He knew better than to rest on his
laurels at the beginning of the fourth quarter. So should we.
If Congress will work with me, then peace itself will be the
greatest dividend of a11.\\\
Before us is a bridge to a new and better world. The way is
clear. It's time to cross. Thank you for inviting me to San
Francisco. God bless you, and God bless America.
#
#
#
NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL
TIME STAMP
EXECUTIVE SECRETARIAT STAFFING DOCUMENT
RECEIVED
SYSTEM LOG NUMBER:
0913
90 FE8 5 5 05
ACTION OFFICER:
RODMAN
DUE: IMMEDIATELY
Prepare Memo For Scowcroft/Gates
Appropriate Action
Prepare Memo For Clcconi
Prepare Memo for Hughes
URGENT
Prepare Memo
SCOWCROFT
to
WINSTON w/ INFO CICCONI
GONCURRENCES/COMMENTS*
PHONE* to action officer at ext.
6907
E
FYI
FYI
Basora
Lampley
Rostow
Beers
Levin
Salvetti
Blackwill Concues
Mahley
Tilley
Charles
Mandel
Tobey concurs
Coulson
Melby conses
Van Eron
Devis
Menan
Watson
Deal
Merchant
Welch
Dorminey
Miller
Whitley
Dyke
Needels
Wilson
Gordon per Hayden
Paal
Working
Grimes
Pacelli
Zelikow
Heass
Passage
FRY emerrs
Hayden consurs
Pilling
Hutchings
Popadiuk
Jackson
Pryce
Henter
Rademaker
Kitchen
Rice per Blackwill
LaMagna
Rodman
INFORMATION
Hughes
Sittmann
Exec. Sec. Desk
Scowcroft (advance)
Gates (advance)
Secretariat
COMMENTS
Logged By AC
Return to Secretariat
Dave
COMMONWEALTH CLUB, SAN FRANCISCO
12 NOON, WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 7TH, 1990
THANK YOU DR. JOSEPH FINK, GOVERNOR DEUKMEIJIAN,
[YOUR GREAT SENATOR, PETE WILSON], AND COMMONWEALTH
CLUB PRESIDENT, JOSEPH PERRELLI. IT'S GREAT TO BE WITH
YOU TODAY.
((A FEW MINUTES AGO, I ASKED A 49ER FAN WHAT HE
THOUGHT WAS THE TURNING POINT IN THE SUPER BOWL. HE
SAID "THE NATIONAL ANTHEM. "))
((OF COURSE, NOT ALL RECENT MEMORIES IN THE BAY
AREA HAVE BEEN PLEASANT ONES. I'M SURE YOU REMEMBER
THE LAST TIME I WAS HERE, AFTER THIS CITY SUFFERED A
TRAGEDY. I REMEMBER A CLUTTER OF CAR WRECKS, THAT
FLATTENED FREEWAY, AND A TERRIBLE BLACK CLOUD RISING
FROM THE MARINA DISTRICT. AND I KNOW SOME DAMAGE
REMAINS. BUT TODAY I'VE SEEN SOMETHING ELSE --
RENEWAL. THE PEOPLE OF THE BAY AREA HAVE STOOD UP,
DUSTED THEMSELVES OFF AND REBUILT. THE DEVASTATION AND
DANGER ARE PAST. BECAUSE YOU CAME TOGETHER, SAN
FRANCISCO IS AS BEAUTIFUL AS EVER\\ -- SAN FRANCISCO IS
BACK.))\\\
- 2 -
I HAVE COME BACK TO CALIFORNIA FOR ANOTHER REASON,
TO GIVE YOU -- NO-NONSENSE, HARDNOSED BUSINESSMEN AND
WOMEN THAT YOU ARE -- A STRAIGHTFORWARD AND HOPEFUL
MESSAGE ABOUT OUR NATIONAL SECURITY. YESTERDAY, AT
FORT IRWIN, I ALSO THANKED OUR MEN AND WOMEN IN UNIFORM
-- NOT JUST BECAUSE THEY KEEP AMERICA SAFE AND FREE. I
CAME TO THANK THEM BECAUSE THEY HELP TO MAKE POSSIBLE
THE WONDERFUL CHANGES THAT ARE SWEEPING THE WORLD.
AND AS THE THREATS TO AMERICAN SECURITY CHANGE, so
TOO MUST OUR DEFENSE STRATEGY. IN 1986, DEFENSE
EXPENDITURES CONSUMED 6.3 PERCENT OF OUR GROSS NATIONAL
PRODUCT. AS YOU KNOW, I JUST SUBMITTED MY 1991 BUDGET
TO CONGRESS, WHICH HOLDS DOWN DEFENSE SPENDING FOR THE
FIFTH YEAR IN A ROW -- DOWN TO JUST ABOVE 5 PERCENT OF
GNP.
I AM SUBMITTING THIS BUDGET AT A TIME WHEN THE
POSTWAR WORLD WE HAVE KNOWN -- THE WORLD THAT BEGAN IN
1945 -- IS CHANGING BEFORE OUR VERY EYES. SO TO
UNDERSTAND WHERE WE ARE GOING, LET ME FIRST REVIEW
WHERE WE HAVE BEEN AND WHERE WE ARE TODAY.
- 3 -
OUR WESTERN
THE FIRST GENERATION OF POSTWAR LEADERS HAD THE
CAUTIONARY EXAMPLE OF THEIR PREDECESSORS. THEY
REMEMBERED THAT THE GREAT WAR -- THE WAR TO END ALL
WARS -- WAS FOLLOWED BY CHAOS AND CONFLICT. THEY
REMEMBERED THAT VISIONARY STATESMEN, AFTER THE FIRST
WORLD WAR, HAD TRIED TO LIMIT LARGE NAVIES -- EVEN
OUTLAWED WAR ITSELF. BUT SOON THESE GREAT HOPES FADED
IN THE FACE OF UNCHECKED AGGRESSION. AND NO PACT COULD
PREVENT WORLD WAR TWO.
so BY 1945 OUR LEADERS HAD ACQUIRED A REALISM BORN
OF BLOODY EXPERIENCE, 11 A PRAGMATISM BORN OF A SOBER
APPRAISAL OF THE WORLD AS IT WAS. AND FROM HARRY
TRUMAN TO RONALD REAGAN, OUR STRENGTH BECAME THE
WORLD'S SHIELD; OUR IDEALS OF FREEDOM AND DEMOCRACY,
THE WORLD'S HOPE. WE PAID DEARLY FOR THE DEFENSE OF
LIBERTY -- WITH OUR NATIONAL WEALTH, AND WITH MANY OF
OUR YOUNGEST AND BRAVEST.
- 4 -
AND so, OVER THE PAST 40 YEARS, OUR LEADERS
CONTINUED TO PROVIDE FOR WAR EVEN AS THEY SOUGHT PEACE.
IT WAS DURING THE TRUMAN ADMINISTRATION, IN THIS VERY
CITY, THAT MEN AND WOMEN OF GREAT VISION AND HIGH
IDEALS CAME FROM AROUND THE WORLD TO CREATE AN ASSEMBLY
OF NATIONS. AND SO IT WAS IN SAN FRANCISCO, 45 YEARS
AGO, THAT THE UNITED NATIONS WAS BORN.
THEN, AS NOW, THE UNITED STATES STROVE TO BALANCE
ITS ROLE AS PEACE-KEEPER WITH THAT OF PEACE-MAKER. WE
1
HELPED CREATE THE UNITED NATIONS AND NATO; WE
ENCOURAGED SOVIET CHANGE EVEN AS WE THWARTED SOVIET
EXPANSION.
- 5 -
THOSE WHO CRAFTED THIS NEW POLICY CALLED IT
CONTAINMENT, AND PREDICTED THAT IF WE BLOCKED THE EASY
PATH OF EXPANSION, THE SOVIET UNION WOULD ONE DAY HAVE
TO CONFRONT THE CONTRADICTIONS OF ITS INHUMANE,
ILLOGICAL SYSTEM. THE PURPOSE OF CONTAINMENT WAS NOT
TO DEFEAT OR HUMILIATE THE SOVIETS. THE PURPOSE WAS TO
PRESERVE AND EXTEND LIBERTY. THE HOPE WAS SOMEDAY TO
SEE, AS GEORGE KENNAN PUT IT IN 1947, "THE GRADUAL
MELLOWING OF SOVIET POWER." IT TOOK NEARLY HALF A
CENTURY TO VINDICATE THIS STRATEGY, BUT WE CAN NOW SEE
FULL
THE RESULTS: TODAY, THE COLD WAR IS IN RETREAT. 111
^
THAT IS GOOD NEWS, FOR NO SANE MAN OR WOMAN IS
NOSTALGIC FOR THE COLD WAR. WE ARE INSPIRED BY THIS
REVOLUTION OF '89 -- HEARTENED, FOR EXAMPLE, TO SEE A
MAN OF LETTERS AND CONSCIENCE IN PRAGUE MOVE FROM
PRISON TO THE PRESIDENTIAL PALACE. WE ARE HEARTENED TO
SEE THE BERLIN WALL FALL, SETTING OFF A SHOCKWAVE THAT
UPENDED A TYRANT IN ROMANIA.
- 6 -
AND WE ARE GRATEFUL FOR SOMETHING MORE. NOW,
BECAUSE OF OUR STRENGTH AND THAT OF OUR ALLIES; NOW,
THANKS TO THE MARCH OF FREEDOM AND DEMOCRACY IN EASTERN
EUROPE -- AND EVEN IN THE SOVIET UNION ITSELF -- NOW
THE PROSPECTS FOR AN ENDURING PEACE ARE GREATER THAN
EVER BEFORE. WE CAN NOW ENVISION A NEW DESTINY FOR THE
NATIONS OF THE CONTINENT -- THAT OF A EUROPE TRULY
WHOLE AND FREE. III
WE ARE TAKING THE FIRST STEPS ACROSS A BRIDGE
BEGUN BY OTHERS LONG AGO. IT IS A BRIDGE THAT CAN LEAD
US FROM SEEMINGLY ENDLESS CONFLICT TO THE PROMISE OF A
LASTING PEACE. BUT NO MATTER HOW GREAT THE PROMISE, WE
MUST BE CERTAIN THE BRIDGE IS SECURE.
AS PRESIDENT, I RECEIVE AN INTELLIGENCE BRIEFING
EVERY MORNING. AND I RECEIVE THE BEST INFORMATION
AVAILABLE TO ANY WORLD LEADER TODAY. YET THE MORNING
NEWS IS OFTEN OVERTAKEN BY THE NEWS THAT VERY EVENING.
THE WORLD IS SIMPLY MOVING TOO FAST TO FORECAST WITH
ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY WHAT WILL HAPPEN NEXT. OUR
CHALLENGE IS TO MANAGE THIS PERIOD OF TRANSITION FROM
THE WORLD OF TODAY TO THE WORLD OF TOMORROW -- AND
SAFEGUARD THE SECURITY OF AMERICA IN THE PROCESS.
When of cons to the security of this country
I'd rather be cantions than rechiles
- 7 -
OUR PURSUIT OF THIS PROMISING FUTURE MUST START
WITH AN UNDERSTANDING OF TODAY'S REALITIES.
OUR
TAKE, FOR EXAMPLE, MY MOST RECENT PROPOSAL, WARMLY
RECEIVED BY OUR ALLIES AND PRESIDENT GORBACHEV. I
PROPOSED REDUCING THE TROOP LEVELS ON BOTH SIDES IN
CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE TO 195,000 TROOPS. THAT Balance
THE LESS THREATENING FUTURE WE ENVISION, AND IT HOLDS
encourage
GREAT PROMISE.
BUT RIGHT NOW THE SOVIETS STILL HAVE MORE THAN
560,000 MEN UNDER ARMS IN CENTRAL EUROPE.
ON THE ISSUE OF STRATEGIC WEAPONS WE HAVE MADE
PROGRESS IN THE START NEGOTIATIONS. WE NOW HOPE TO
SLASH THE NUMBER OF STRATEGIC WEAPONS ON BOTH SIDES IN
HALF. IT IS THESE IMPORTANT REDUCTIONS THAT SECRETARY
BAKER IS SEEKING THIS VERY DAY IN MOSCOW. THAT'S THE
FUTURE WE ENVISION, AND IT TOO HOLDS GREAT PROMISE.
- 8 -
BUT LET US NOT FORGET THAT RIGHT NOW THE SOVIETS
STILL HAVE MORE THAN 10,000 STRATEGIC WEAPONS. THEY
ARE MODERNIZING THEM; THEY HAVE DEPLOYED TWO NEW MOBILE
ICBMS, AND THEIR SPENDING ON THEIR STRATEGIC DEFENSE
INITIATIVE IS COMPARABLE TO THEIR SPENDING ON STRATEGIC
OFFENSIVE FORCES.
The AS PRESIDENT, I AM THE COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF, I AM
BOUND BY THE CONSTITUTION TO DEFEND AND PROTECT THE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. SOME WOULD HAVE ME PREDICATE
THE DEFENSE OF OUR PEOPLE ON PROMISING, BUT AS YET
UNFULFILLED, HOPES FOR THE FUTURE. I WILL NOT. I AM
WITH w
DETERMINED TO SEEK FROM THE SOVIETS THE COLLATERAL TO
IMPLEMENT A NEW PEACE. IN INTERNATIONAL TERMS,
COLLATERAL MEANS: SOLDIERS DISCHARGED, TANKS
DISMANTLED, NUCLEAR MISSILES DEMOLISHED, AND CHEMICAL
WEAPONS BANNED FROM THE FACE OF THE EARTH.\\\
- 9 -
SOME SEE OUR MEASURED APPROACH AS ENDANGERING THE
PROCESS OF CHANGE. I SEE OUR APPROACH AS ESSENTIAL TO
CHANGE, ESSENTIAL TO THE SECURITY OF THIS NATION AND AS
THE ONLY WAY TO A LASTING PEACE. WE HAVE SHOWN THAT
AMERICAN RESOLVE CAN HELP FURTHER SOVIET REFORM. WE
HAVE SHOWN THAT AMERICAN STRENGTH IS THE CATALYST FOR
ARMS CONTROL. WE HAVE SHOWN THAT THE IDEA CALLED
AMERICA CAN INSPIRE CHANGE. NOW WE MUST NOT LET
HORE TO
IMPATIENCE, BORN OF EUPHORIA, JEOPARDIZE ALL WE HAVE ACHIEVE.
ACHIEVED so FAR, AND ALL WE CAN ACHIEVE IN THE FUTURE.
NO MATTER HOW URGENTLY WE WANT TO CROSS THAT
BRIDGE BETWEEN NATIONS, TO CROSS TO A NEW AND MORE
PROMISING WORLD, WE SHOULD NOT, IN OUR HASTE, ABANDON
THE PATH THAT BROUGHT US TO THIS MOMENT.
- 10 -
FIRST, AS AMERICANS HAVE ALWAYS BELIEVED, OUR
FOREMOST GOAL IS TO PREVENT ANOTHER WORLD WAR. TO DO
REMAIN FULLY ENGAGED.
so, WE WILL STILL NEED TO MAINTAIN THE GLOBAL BALANCE
OF POWER. EUROPEAN SECURITY, STABILITY AND FREEDOM --
SO TIED TO OUR OWN -- REQUIRES AN AMERICAN PRESENCE.
Western Europeans all want usto stay there
WE MUST REMAIN THERE AS LONG AS WE ARE NEEDED AND
WANTED. THE PROSPECT OF GLOBAL PEACE, THEREFORE,
insert
DEPENDS ON AN AMERICAN FORWARD PRESENCE WITH GLOBAL
REACH
SECOND, WE WILL, OF COURSE, CONTINUE TO REDUCE THE
LIKELIHOOD OF A NUCLEAR WAR. AND THAT IS WHY I WILL
VIGOROUSLY PURSUE OUR START TALKS WITH THE SOVIET
UNION. III BUT ARMS CONTROL AND STRATEGIC MODERNIZATION
ARE NOT COMPETING STRATEGIES. RATHER, THEY CAN WORK
TOGETHER TO MAKE THE WORLD A SAFER PLACE.
- 11 -
JUST THIS MORNING, I VISITED LAWRENCE LIVERMORE
LABS AND MET THOSE VISIONARY MEN AND WOMEN WHO STRIVE
TO MAKE A NUCLEAR STRIKE ON OUR COUNTRY -- WHETHER FROM
A NUCLEAR SUPERPOWER, OR RENEGADE NATION, OR TERRORIST
GROUP -- EVEN MORE UNLIKELY THAT IT IS TODAY. IF THE
TECHNOLOGY I HAVE SEEN TODAY PROVES FEASIBLE -- AND IT
LOOKS VERY PROMISING -- NO AGGRESSOR COULD BE CONFIDENT
OF THE SUCCESS OF A BALLISTIC MISSILE ATTACK. THAT'S
WHAT DETERRENCE IS ALL ABOUT. WHEN SOME COMPLAIN OF
THE COST OF DEVELOPING SUCH TECHNOLOGIES, THEY SHOULD
FIRST CONSIDER THE COST OF NOT DOING ALL WE CAN TO
DETER CONFLICT AND PROTECT THE CITIES AND CITIZENS OF
AMERICA. THAT IS WHY I WILL SEEK TO PERSUADE THE
SOVIETS, THROUGH OUR DEFENSE AND SPACE TALKS, THAT, IN
FACT, GREATER RELIANCE ON STRATEGIC DEFENSES WILL
CONTRIBUTE TO A SAFER WORLD.
LET ME NOW TELL YOU SOMETHING ABOUT THE STRATEGY
BEHIND OUR 1991 DEFENSE BUDGET:
- 12 -
FIRST, NEW THREATS ARE EMERGING BEYOND THE
TRADITIONAL EAST-WEST ANTAGONISM OF THE PAST 45 YEARS.
THESE CONTINGENCIES MUST LOOM LARGER IN OUR DEFENSE
PLANNING. REMEMBER THE THREATS OF LIBYAN AND IRANIAN
TERRORISM
REMEMBER OUR LIBERATION OF GRENADA AND
services
PANAMAX AND REMEMBER THE DEDICATION OF THE U.S. NAVY
ON DUTY IN THE PERSIAN GULF TWO YEARS AGO, SAFEGUARDING
THE FLOW OF OIL / TO THE INDUSTRIAL DEMOCRACIES
REMEMBER, Too, THAT THERE ARE MORE THAN 15
COUNTRIES IN THE WORLD THAT WILL HAVE DEVELOPED
BALLISTIC MISSILES BY THE END OF THE DECADE -- MANY
WITH CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL CAPABILITIES. NUCLEAR
WEAPONS CAPABILITIES ARE PROLIFERATING AS WELL. AND
INEVITABLY HIGH-TECH WEAPONS WILL FALL INTO THE HANDS
OF THOSE WHOSE HATRED OF AMERICA, AND CONTEMPT FOR
continue
CIVILIZED NORMS, IS WELL KNOWN. WE WILL WORK HARD TO
PREVENT THIS DANGEROUS PROLIFERATION. BUT ONE THING IS
CERTAIN: WE MUST BE READY FOR ITS CONSEQUENCES. AND WE
WILL BE READY. 11
- 13 -
THEN THERE ARE THE NARCO-GANGSTERS -- ALREADY A
THREAT TO OUR NATIONAL HEALTH AND SPIRIT. NOW THEY ARE
TAKING ON THE PRETENSIONS OF A GEOPOLITICAL FORCE. AND
THEY MUST BE DEALT WITH AS SUCH -- BY OUR MILITARY --
IN THE AIR, ON THE LAND, AND ON THE SEAS.
CLEARLY, IN THE FUTURE, WE WILL NEED TO BE ABLE TO
STOP AGGRESSION, REPEL A MISSILE, PROTECT A SEALANE OR
ARREST A DRUG LORD. WE WILL NEED FORCES ADAPTABLE TO
CONDITIONS ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD. WE WILL NEED
AGILITY, READINESS, SUSTAINABILITY. WE WILL NEED SPEED
AND STEALTH. AND WE WILL NEED LEADERSHIP.
IN SHORT, WE MUST CONTINUE TO DETER BOTH A GLOBAL
WAR AND LIMITED CONFLICTS IN NEW CONDITIONS. AND FOR
THIS REASON, WE DOUBLY NEED TO CONTINUE THE
MODERNIZATION OF OUR FORCES. I PRAY, IT WILL NOT BE MY
SAD DUTY TO COMMIT AMERICAN FIGHTING MEN AGAIN TO
COMBAT. BUT IF I DO, WITH THE SECURITY OF THIS NATION
ON MY WATCH, THE LIVES OF AMERICAN FIGHTING MEN WON'T
BE SHORT-CHANGED.
- 14 -
AS I MENTIONED, JUST YESTERDAY, I VISITED THE
NATIONAL TRAINING CENTER AT FORT IRWIN, NEAR BARSTOW,
WHERE OUR FIGHTING FORCES PREPARE FOR ACTION. IT WAS
AT THIS VERY BASE THAT WE TRAINED MANY OF OUR TROOPS
WHO FOUGHT WITH SUCH DISTINCTION IN PANAMA. AND THEY
WERE COURAGEOUS. BUT BEING PREPARED IS ALSO THE BEST
WAY TO ENSURE THAT WARS ARE PREVENTED. AND AFTER
SEEING OUR MEN AND WOMEN AGAIN, TALKING WITH THEM --
THEY'RE INDEED UP TO THE CHALLENGES OF THE FUTURE. 11
((YOU KNOW, I READ THAT KHRUSHCHEV ONCE SPOKE TO
THE COMMONWEALTH CLUB FOR THREE HOURS. III PERHAPS HE
BEGAN HIS SPEECH WITH THESE WORDS: "LET ME MAKE JUST A
FEW BRIEF OBSERVATIONS
.))\\\
so I'LL GET TO MY FINAL CONCERN -- HOW ALL THIS
9
CHANGE IN OUR DEFENSE BUDGET AFFECTS US AT HOME. MANY
SPEAK OF THE PEACE DIVIDEND. FEW DISCUSS THE SHORT-
TERM COST OF PEACE. THERE WILL BE COSTS AS WE CROSS
THE BRIDGE TO A BETTER FUTURE -- FOR DISLOCATED
INDUSTRIES AND WORKERS, FOR COMMUNITIES -- PAINFUL
PERSONAL ADJUSTMENTS TO BE MADE.
- 15 -
BUT AMERICA HAS ALWAYS BEEN WILLING TO PAY THE
PRICE OF PEACE. I KNOW THAT SOME OF THE BASES THAT
HAVE BEEN PROPOSED FOR CUTBACKS ARE IN THIS AREA. BUT
LET ME STATE RIGHT HERE AND NOW: THERE HAVE BEEN NO
POLITICS IN THESE PROPOSALS. SOME TALK ABOUT BASES IN
DEMOCRATIC DISTRICTS HERE -- WELL, THEY ARE ALSO IN THE
SAME STATE AS A REPUBLICAN GOVERNOR. I ASK CONGRESS TO
JOIN ME IN A SPIRIT OF FAIRNESS. LONGSTANDING CRITICS
OF DEFENSE SPENDING SHOULD NOT TURN AROUND AND BLOCK
THE CLOSING OF A BASE IN THEIR HOME DISTRICT. I CANNOT
AND WILL NOT ACCEPT THAT. THE TAXPAYER DESERVES
BETTER, AND so DO THOSE AFFECTED BY OUR DECISIONS. LET
ME ASSURE YOU: IF A BASE CLOSES, IT DOESN'T CLOSE
FEDERAL CONCERN AND COMMITMENT. 11
- 16 -
CIVILIANS WHO ARE LAID OFF WILL RECEIVE TOP
PRIORITY FOR PLACEMENT IN OTHER DOD POSITIONS. THE
HOMEOWNER'S ASSISTANCE PROGRAM WILL PROTECT MILITARY
AND CIVILIAN PERSONNEL FROM FALLING REAL ESTATE PRICES.
AND THE OFFICE OF ECONOMIC ADJUSTMENT WILL WORK WITH
COMMUNITIES TO DEVELOP POWERFUL NEW ECONOMIC ASSETS,
NEW WAYS TO USE OLD BASES. THE BIBLE SPEAKS OF BEATING
SWORDS INTO PLOWSHARES. WE ARE TRANSFORMING MILITARY
RUNWAYS INTO MUNICIPAL AIRPORTS; MILITARY BASES INTO
INDUSTRIAL PARKS AND COMMUNITY COLLEGES; AND MISSILE
HANGARS INTO FACTORIES.
I KNOW THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WILL SUPPORT THESE
MEASURES FOR A CONTINUED STRONG DEFENSE. MY TRAVELS
AROUND THIS COUNTRY TELL ME THAT. BUT TO HAVE THE
MEANS TO NEGOTIATE REDUCTIONS AND ENSURE THE PEACE, I
WILL NEED THE SUPPORT, COOPERATION AND CONSULTATION OF
CONGRESS.
WE CAN NOW ENVISION A TIME WHEN THE WORLD IS MORE
SECURE THAN EVER; WHEN ALL THE COMPETITIVE INSTINCTS OF
MODERN MAN WILL BE DIVERTED TO COMMERCE\\
EVEN TO
FOOTBALL.
- 17 -
YOU KNOW, I STARTED BY JOKING ABOUT THE 49ERS
WINNING THE SUPER BOWL DURING THE NATIONAL ANTHEM. BUT
IT'S NOT HOW MANY PASSES JOE MONTANA COMPLETED. IT'S
THAT HE KNEW BETTER THAN TO REST ON HIS LAURELS AT THE
BEGINNING OF THE FOURTH QUARTER. SO SHOULD WE. I WILL
WORK WITH CONGRESS TO BUILD THAT BRIDGE TO A MORE
SECURE WORLD. AND IF WE WORK TOGETHER, THEN PEACE
ITSELF WILL BE THE GREATEST DIVIDEND OF ALL.\\\
THANK YOU FOR INVITING ME TO SAN FRANCISCO. GOD
BLESS YOU, AND GOD BLESS AMERICA.
#
#
#
THE WRITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
(San Francisco, California)
For Immediate Release
February 7, 1990
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
IN QUESTION AND ANSWER SESSION WITH
MEMBERS OF THE COMMONWEALTH CLUB
San Francisco Hilton Hotel
San Francisco, California
12:59 P.M. PST
8
Having reviewed SDI at Livermore Lab today, do you
support moving ahead with the project?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I do. And our budget calls for
that. And again, I would remind the critics that it is defensive;
that the science and technology from it will benefit not just this
concept of a reasonably-priced way of intercepting somebody else's
missile -- whether it's from a major power or from some renegade hand
-- but that the science will benefit, I believe, the environment -- I
believe it has enormous potential for other uses. I feel more
strongly about that then when I went to Livermore.
of Will the expected troop reductions bring about a
savings that can be used to offset the increased cost in strategic
arms?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes. And I hope that there will not be a
greatly increased cost in strategic arms. The Soviets have
modernized. They've modernized their systems and we have not yet.
But I would hope that the resulting reductions in the strategic arms,
which I am pledged to and which I will work for, will have a
beneficial effect on -- and will result in savings.
You see, I am convinced that if politics of international
change are handled correctly and if things go more forward, we will
eventually have far lower levels of spending. But I've spelled out
for you here why I think that should be approached in a very prudent
manner.
! with the recent events in Eastern Europe, do you
think we should now again prepare for a world economic struggle,
rather than be preparing unnecessarily for a military struggle?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I wouldn't necessarily shift
priorities. I've told you the priority I place on defense. But when
it comes to competitiveness of the United States, we should be
struggling with that on the front burner right now. And I think we
are. And that's one of the reasons I increased dramatically R&D
spending in our budget. It's one of the inevitable by-products of a
better education system. It's why we're putting more emphasis on
math and science. It's why I'm imposing on great scientists like
David Packard and others to give us the advice on how we can become
more competitive. It's why my trade negotiator, Carla Hills, and our
Secretary of Commerce are doing their level best to convince people
that if we are going to have free trade, that has to be fair trade.
And so this competition on the economic front is big;
it's going to get even bigger, in my view, and we've got an enormous
job to do. Not just the federal government; we can't do this. Many
businesses have already moved into much more -- in the sense of
quality product -- moved much more into the sense of automation and
MORE
e 2 -
moderpisation. So it 10 a national goal that we be more competitive,
but 18 can't wait until we get our defense program in line. It's
right mow. It's urgent. (Applause.)
And let me just throw in one, Joe, on the success of the
Uruguay trade round, for those who are a little more
technically-oriented than some. The success of this Uruguay trade
round is very, very important to our ability to enhance the rest of
the world and ourselves by free trade. But we've got some big
barriers out there. We've got some problems we have to overcome.
or
Can you pledge that a certain amount of dollars from
armament reduction be transferred as a reduction in the debt?
THE PRESIDENT: No, I can't pledge that, but I an pledged
to get the deficit down in accordance with the Gramm-Rudman targets.
We will have that, if we get our way with Congress -- which doesn't
exactly do things the way I want, I've found out -- (laughter) -- but
if we g t that done, I stated in my State of the Union message, that
that should be an objective. And to move right into it, the minute
we are in balance -- which would be in three years. Now, I expect
there will be a lot of pressure on. You hear pressure today on what
is referred to alluring as a peace dividend. And it appeals to me.
There are things that I'd love to be able to say, we can put a little
more in this research, or we can help this homeless person a little
more, or whatever it is. The pressures will be on, but I think that
it would be a very good thing to do -- because I have this -- as a
grandparent of 12 I must confess, like a lot of people here, you
feel that we are burdening the generations to come with a debt that
does nothing but click off at the beginning of each year an
enormously high and even higher rate of interest that we're pledged
-- interest account that we're pledged to pay on the national debt.
so, yes, as I said in the State of the Union, that's what I want to
do. (Applause.)
0
If the Soviet Union and others in the Warsaw Pact
substantially scale back their military commitment, doesn't the U.S.
run the risk of moving in the opposite direction of the world? Are
we prepared to stand alone?
THE PRESIDENT: No, because I think as I mentioned to you
earlier, and this is the truth, our allies want us involved. They
don't want to see us decouple or delink from Europe. They see the
changes and welcome them. All the allied leaders -- and I talk to
the leaders of NATO on a fairly regular basis -- they see and welcome
the change, but they do not want to see the United States pull back
into what would be perceived worldwide as some kind of a
neo-isolationist decoupling.
And I am not suggesting that we can't save money; indeed,
we will. If our proposal -- the proposal that I put forward -- is
accepted by the Soviets, and we negotiate out all the details and get
a CFE, Conventional Force Agreement, as we are proposing, I think we
will see substantial savings in -- that are made by the -- what do
you call it? Suddenly gone blank -- in terms of when you bring a guy
back and he no longer is in the army -- (laughter) -- but it's not
just transferring, it's a question of having fewer troops on both
sides. And that will result in some savings.
so we're aware that there's a chance to save, but it is
not that we are going to be swimming against the tide with our
European allies. And as I said in the speech -- and I recognize his
question -- didn't indicate the guy that asked the question was
asleep, he probably wrote the question before the speech -- I hope.
(Laughter.) But what I also said is that I hope and believe that
many of the new fledgling democracies in Eastern Europe are going to
welcome a stabilizing presence on the part of the United States.
NOW, some will say that's sacrificing. And I say, no, it is in our
interest because we provide a certain stability that wouldn't be
there if we, the United States, weren't there.
0
Do you see the freedom of the communist country as a
MORE
- 3 -
threat to the globe? That is, if they all want the conforts we have,
will we use up the resources of our Earth at an even greater rate?
THE PRESIDENT: No. I think there's an environmental
awareness in the world today that is encouraging. I will readily
concede there are some in what is known as the Third World -- I'm not
thinking so much as the evolution of Eastern Europe into the arms of
democracy -- but I think there's a feeling in some Third World
countries, don't you big guys from the United States who have raped,
pillaged and plundered the environment now come and tell us what we
can't do. We understand that. But we've got to work with them and
share our tremendously advanced technology, existing technology, as
we work to find even greater technological breakthroughs to protect
the environment.
But I don't think you're going to necessarily see that is
because of the evolution of Iron Curtain countries into growing --
hopefully, growing democracies. I think there's an awareness now in
Europe about the need to have sound international environmental
practice based on science. Not on myth, but on science.
0
As Eastern Europe and the U.S.S.R. progress toward
democracy, do you see foresee any potential military alliances being
formed that could threaten the Free World, such as a united Germany
and Japan?
THE PRESIDENT: No, I don't. And I think everybody
that's interested in foreign affairs, I'm sure, has an opinion one
way or another as to what happens on the reunification of Germany.
But I think that can be -- well, let me recite just as background the
U.S. position, which is, self-determination -- and this is the NATO
position self-determination, and then when it comes to borders, I
believe Helsinki says no alteration in borders without agreement of
the parties. So that gives you a rather stable framework.
Now, you can read every day about the rapidity of change
and what might happen in terms of German reunification. But I think
it can be managed in such a way that it will not be a threat to
Western Europe or to what was termed in the question, I think, the
Free World. And when I hear both Mr. Genscher and Chancellor Kohl
talking about a Germany that remains tied into NATO in some way --
maybe not a NATO in exactly the same form it is -- but that's
encouraging. That's encouraging.
X
In the past, smaller countries used to play the U.S.
versus the U.S.S.R. to get military and economic aid. Now that
relations have improved with the U.S.S.R., and if we can anticipate
continued improvement, what are the chances of the U.S. and the
U.S.S.R. working together to solve some of the world's problems, such
as the Middle-East?
THE PRESIDENT: Better, far better. And I think there's
certain things that the Soviet Union could do that would facilitate
their role as a catalyst for peace in the Middle East. One of them
would be to assist more, through transportation direct flights --
for Soviet Jews wishing to leave the Soviet Union to go to Israel. I
think that would send a sign that their presence -- their interest in
the Middle East is not just on the side of what heretofore has been
the side OF the more radical states in the area. so they can do
something like that. I'd like to see them normalize diplomatic
relations with the State of Israel. I think that would be helpful.
But I would think that, as the Soviet Union evolves in a more
democratic fashion, that some of the concerns we've had in the past
will be lessened.
So I wouldn't say that at some point they wouldn't have a
useful role. I've cited two areas where I think they can have a
useful role in building credibility, not just with the State of
Israel, but with other states as well. So let's hope that they can
do something. (Applause.)
0
How can we help Mr. Gorbachev in his quest for a
MORE
- 4 -
unification of his country, in demonstration of his country?
THE PRESIDENT: I think we can avoid doing dumb things.
(Laughter and applause.) And that's my cautious approach. You know,
there is a - he's facing some enormously difficult internal
problems. And you may have noted that I have been -- hopefully on
behalf of most the people in our country -- supporting perestroika.
When on for a few months into our presidency -- mine -- why, people
wondered what, does he really care? Does he understand these
changes? Is he willing to support -- does he really mean it when be
says, I support perestroika? I do. And glasnost, the openness
concept, as well.
But in the last press conference or so -- a couple of
them, maybe -- I referred to support for Gorbachev. And I have felt
that he has handled some extraordinarily complicated internal
problems -- problems inside the Soviet Union -- with a certain
restraint and finesse that I think demonstrates a real commitment to
peaceful change. I think what's coming out now in the plenum - the
last thing I think any United States citizen needs to do is when you
have the Central Committee meeting is to try to fine-tune it from San
Francisco or Washington as to how they ought to conduct themselves.
(Laughter.) So I want to be very careful about picking winners and
losers, or saying how they ought to do things.
But I do think that, generally speaking, it is in our
interest to support perestroika, and I will say again, I think Mr.
Gorbachev has shown a considerable restraint. And frankly, the
dealings that I've had with him here and then on the sidelines when
George and President Reagan were dealing with him, is that he's a man
who you can talk to; he's quite open in his negotiations. Be damn
sure will tell you if he doesn't agree with you. (Laughter.) I
mean, you're not under any doubt about that. (Laughter.) But it's a
new approach. I mean, it's very different than dealing with some of
the previous Soviet leaders.
So I'm not here to annoint or try to shape the
deliberations of the Central Committee proceedings in the Soviet
Union -- this very day, or that will commence again tomorrow, maybe.
But I do think that there's an awful lot to be hopeful about there
because I find we can talk quite openly. And I'm looking forward to
a summit meeting. I don't know why all meetings have to be called
summits. (Laughter.) We tried to call the Malta meetings something
else, and it lasted for about two days. (Laughter.) And I mean it,
because I think summit projects the idea that you have to have some
massive break-through, or else you disappoint the rest of the world.
And I've changed my thinking on this. I think maybe communications
where you don't have to do that is better. And that's why I was on
the phone with him the other day on a couple of matters. So I'm
optimistic about our dealings with him, but I cannot predict -- and
nor can any of you with any degree of accuracy exactly what's
going to happen inside the Soviet Union.
&
Please comment on Mikhail Gorbachev's nomination for
the Nobel Peace Prize.
THE PRESIDENT: I'd hate to say I wasn't aware of it, but
: wesn't aware of it. (Laughter.) And I Ann't follow those
proceedings too closely. (Laughter.) But I've told you, I would
salute the man for his adherence to peaceful change in Eastern
Europe. I mean, that I think, is dramatic and I think worthy of a
positive note. But far be it for me to try to influence the gurus
that decide who wins a Nobel Prize. (Laughter and applause.)
a
As far as the issue of drug trafficking goes and the
world drug problem, could you please address the issue of whether os
not military forces will be used in a more direct way in the
enforcement of international drug traffick?
THE PRESIDENT: NO, not in a more direct way. Military
forces have been used over the years. The arrest power rests with
the Coast Guard. The Coast Guardsman can be abourd naval vessels.
MORE
- 5 -
But we have an interdiction network that is manned and operated by
our military. But in terms of ce what the question implies to me at
least -- of a quantus leap forward in terms of this I don't know.
One of the things I have felt is that sometimes the
military says, well, we can't undertake this mission or that because
of readiness. It is my view that sometimes an exercise that results
in the interdiction of aircraft coming into this country on an
illegal mission is a good mission and should not be detracted from
the readiness. so I think that we're always looking at the mission
of the military in this regard, but I don't want to give the military
more arrest powers. I think we've got a very proper justice system
in this country. I do think that they can be extraordinarily useful
and have been in interdiction and in working with countries that want
their cooperation.
Q
Are you prepared to use troops in the United States
to enforce the laws against drug consumption -- to cut down on the
demand which entices the supply?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, not to cut down on the demand. I
don't think that's a function of the U.S. military. We have police
powers in this country; they are properly defined and that should
not, in my view, be altered.
Q
There are many questions that ask why do you find it
necessary --
THE PRESIDENT: The demand -- let me be sure -- the
demand side really relates also to education. To people, this is
bad, you should not do this. We've condoned things in this country
that we should have condemned long ago in terms of narcotics.
(Applause.)
or There are several questions that have asked why do
you find it necessary to physically go to Colombia?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, let me explain that to you because
I think it's on the minds of a lot of people. I went to a barbecue
in Beeville, Texas -- (laughter) -- and there were 800 people there
-- not quite this big a mob -- and I thought, well, these people are
doing this to welcome me back to South Texas. And I decided I would
shake hands with everybody there. We politicians all alike, you
know, go out there and shake hands. Art, you know how that is.
(Laughter.) so out 1 went. And I think about 15 percent of them at
that point said, hey, you know we're hoping you don't do this.
Let me explain it to you. In the first place, I am not
going to do something stupid or macho. (Laughter.) I love the guy
-- the guy they used to call timid is now Macho Man or something.
(Laughter and applause.) It has nothing to do with that. It doesn't
have anything to do with personal. It has a lot to do with the
support for a courageous leader in Colombia.
And I believe, and I think this goes for those who have
the responsibility of protecting any president of the United States.
that the security of the President can be protected -- on this naval
base, a place where the man has his own home that is cut off from the
mainland except by one entrance.
And I don't want to send a signal on your behalf or my
behalf that the United States says to this great President, "Look,
our President can't come there even though we think the security can
be granted -- can be guaranteed and thus push him, perhaps
inadvertently to make a kind of deal that he has resisted making with
these narco-traffickers.
I talked to a foreign leader the other day, from South
America, and he agrees with this rational. So it isn't whimsical or
a desire to be in harms way. I think we've got good arrangements,
and I think it is good sound anti-narcotic policy to support
President Barco who is doing an awful lot to protect our kids from
MORE
- 6 -
the scourge of narcotics. (Applause.)
Q There are claims that the removal of General Ortega
will improve our efforts at interdicting drug -- international drug
trafficking. DO you agree with this?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I do, because there's some symbolism
there and just as I think the extradition of Carlos Lehder and the
Colombians pursuit of the drug lord that was recently killed down
there in battle in Colombia -- Those things help, because if they see
major participants, traffickers going about their life without
threat, why, I just think it sends the wrong signal.
0 Since the Panama invasion, have our relations with
Mexico improved?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes. And I'll tell you one thing that
was good. Our Secretary of the Treasury went down there maybe -- 1
don't know whether you saw it on Sunday -- and signed with President
Salinas, the very fine young President of Mexico, an agreement on
Third World debt. I think that was a good sign. I -- look, I think
I know enough about this hemisphere to know that anytime a United
States force is used in Central America or wherever else in this
hemisphere, there are going to be concerns built on a foundation of
history that concern our friends and those who are less friendly to
us in this hemisphere. But I've explained as best I can, through
letter and by phone, to these leaders why we acted the way we did.
I will tell you that I am convinced not only will the
relation -- is the relationship with Mexico good and is it strong, I
see nothing but making it even better. And I'm going to work at
that, because Mexico we must not take for granted the fact that we
have marvelously strong allies to our North and friends to our South.
Sometimes, blessed as we our by our own geography, we forget that.
And there could be an inclination to neglect our neighbors, and I
don't want to do that. And I can't tell you that there has been no
strains, but I think some of what you've been reading about South
American reaction has been overstated. And I base that on some
contact with the individual leaders in this hemisphere. But it's an
exciting hemisphere. This hemisphere can be, in the next couple of
years, totally democratic. We must not neglect it.
So if somebody disagrees with me on Panama and South
America or Central America, that just redoubles my desire to make it
right. Make them understand that the President of the United States
is going to protect American life. Make them understand that 92
percent of the people in Panama support what I did. Make them
understand that democracy now has a chance. And make them understand
that we're going to assist that democracy. Once I do a better job of
that, I think any last concerns about what happened there will be
laid to rest. (Applause.)
0 Why are we wasting time with Noriega when he cannot
possibly receive a constitutionally=fair trail without compromising
national security? Why not send him to exile in a country willing to
take him? (Laughter.)
THE PRESIDENT: Well, the line is not very long for one
thing. And secondly -- (laughter.) Secondly, look -- I would just
disagree with the person writing the question that the given is he
can't get a fair trial. of course, he can get a fair trial. And
we've seen that over and over again in highly-controversial cases.
And so our justice system that bends over backwards to be fair will,
indeed, acquit itself well in this case.
! Is your administration --
THE PRESIDENT: And should. The man's entitled to a fair
trial.
governments or you dislike, even if they carry their public support,
Is your administration prepared to accept
MORE
- 7 -
such as the Sandinistas in Nicaragua?
THE PRESIDENT: Please define acceptance. (Laughter.) I
mean, we are - my aspiration is to help and assist those countries
in this hemisphere that want to walk down democracy's road. Freedom.
Democracy. The very things that we see -- changes that we see coming
forward in Eastern Europe. Who would have thought we'd be talking
about trying to assist Czechoslovakia a year ago? Or Romania? or
some of these other countries? So I don't think we can dictate
exactly what kind of system somebody else has. It's not our
business, particularly if they have free and certifiably fair
elections. But I think one's inclination is to help those who have
the same reverence for democracy and freedom that we have.
2
You stated in your State of the Union Address that
you wish to improve education and to implement the goal of best by
2000 -- the year 2000. HOW do you plan to implement your goal of
having our graduates be the best by the year 2000?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, we have a sound program, what I
call the Education Excellence Act, before the Congress today. It's
complex legislation, but I want to see it passed. Probably get
amended, probably get changed, but it challenges people to think
anew. We've gotten the governors together in a governors conference
that was more than just frill. What it did was set -- agree to set
national goals. And in the speech the other night, I spelled out
four of the national goals that the governors have agreed should be
national, and they, themselves, will get to work and redouble their
efforts in their states and try to encourage the localities to
implement the program that we've spelled out.
But lot me be careful here, because it isn't the role of
the federal government to do this alone. It can't do it. Seven
percent of the educational spending in this country is federal. And
the rest, for very understandable, and I think, wonderful reasons,
belong at the state and local level -- or private educational
institution level.
And so, we can exhort; we can push for the kind of
legislation; we can push for implementation of the national goals
through the use of the bully-pulpit in the White House, and then,
we've got to encourage the governors and the local school boards and
our teachers when it comes to alternative certification, and all of
these things, to think anew. And we can do this. But we're trying
to set from Washington -- put some emphasis on things, like math and
science, so we can guarantee our ability to compete in the future.
But the federal government isn't going to do it alone. It wouldn't
be good, either, for the federal government to try to do it alone.
(Applause.)
Q President Bush, this is your last question, and
before I ask the question, I wish to remind our audience to please
remain seated until President Bush and Governor Deukmeijian have left
the room. This is a summary of many different questions that I've
received, President Bush, and that is, where is Mrs. Bush and how is
she? (Laughter and applause.)
Extended Dans 13.1
THE PRESIDENT: I know you'll never believe this, but I'm
getting a terrible inferiority complex. (Laughter.) She's fine.
And we both have something in common now -- the vision thing --
because she has this eye problem. But she is doing very well. There
is no hidden agenda to her health. And today, she is down as one of
the Thousand Points of Light, which she's been for a long time,
helping on literacy in Southern California. And I'll meet her
tonight in Omaha. But she's doing just great, and thank you for
asking about her. Thank you very much. (Applause.)
END
1:31 P.M. PST