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
323154674
label
Foreign Policy 1989 [OA 4423]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
323154674
contentType
document
title
Foreign Policy 1989 [OA 4423]
citationUrl
identifierLocal
13880-011
collections
Records of the White House Office of Speechwriting (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Mary Kate Grant Subject Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
323154674
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
a41eadb6d116263d
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:
Grant, Mary Kate, Files
Subseries:
Subject File, 1988-1991
OA/ID Number:
13880
Folder ID Number:
13880-011
Folder Title:
Foreign Policy, 1989
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
19
2
7
5
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
(Warsaw, Poland)
For Immediate Release
July 10, 1989
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
AT JOINT SESSION OF PARLIAMENT
The Sejm
Warsaw, Poland
2:28 P.M. (L)
and Stelmachowski, Prime Minister Rakowski and
THE PRESIDENT: Chairman Jaruzelski, Marshall Kozakiewicz
delegates, to on behalf of the people of the United senators States, and I
To be greet the newly-elected representatives of the Polish Parliament. am honored
extraordinary, indeed thrilling times.
here with you on this occasion is proof that we live in
Lech the world -- a photo of General Jaruzelski, Senator --
around clear to me when I saw a photo -- a worldwide photo flashed made all
The power and potential of this moment was first
committed shoulder-to-shoulder at the opening session of this Parliament Walesa --
Walesa shoulder-to-shoulder -- Solidarity Leader Lech Leader --
wonderful signal all around the world.
to new progress in Poland. Believe me, that sent a
by than ties sentiment. of kinship and culture. But our peoples are linked by more
Poland and the United States are bound, it is often said,
peers -- ahead of her time -- in the pursuit of freedom and
The May 3rd Constitution of 1791 set Poland ahead of her
democratic ideas, just as our Constitution -- the American
of Constitution the indivídual. of 1787 set new standards for protection of the rights
commitment prosperity. And we are proud of our early independence, and
Conference, freedom, the United States has stood for Polish Peace
For decades, beginning with the Versailles
am here to Polish self-determination. As America's President, longstanding I
today to reaffirm that proud commitment.
for I began my own public service in the American
I understand something of the work you are commencing,
Democratically-chosen forums legislatures are among mankind's Congress.
didn't circumstances in your country. And so, too, perhaps Many of you
before, I díd not expect to return so soon -- nor to such altered
for debate and díalogue. And while I've been to greatest Poland
has parliament. And your achievement has surpassed all expectation and
expect to be here -- serving in this, or any Polish
earned all our admiration.
age.
Our meeting today bears witness to the character of OF
came to understand the natural order of the planets -- and ha
Some 450 years ago, when the Polish astronomer Cop
of year forward, as Poland works to reaffirm the nat
From courage this to question accepted wisdom -- the world was changed
man and government, so too will Poland be changed forev
Poland is indeed Copernican. A fundamental change in P
For today the scope of political and economi
MORE
- 6 -
On May 3, 1991, the Polish constitution will also be 200
years old. Your constitution of 1791 was crushed, but never
forgotten. And now, this generation's calling is to redeem the
promise of a free Polish republic. Poland has not been lost so long
as the Polish spirit lives. (Applause.)
America wishes you well as you face the tough problems
today. I salute General Jaruzelski for his leadership and his
extraordinary hospitality to me. I salute the leaders and members of
these two great legislative bodies. God, in His infinite wisdom and
love, is with us in this chamber. May God bless you and your
efforts. Long live Poland. Long live Poland. Thank you very, very
much. (Applause.)
END
2:58 P.M. (L)
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
(Warsaw, Poland)
EMBARGOED FOR RELEASE
UNTIL 2:30 PM (L)
8:30 AM EDT
MONDAY, JULY 10, 1989
FACT SHEET
GSP FOR POLAND
Purpose and Scone
To support ongoing reform and economic recovery in
Poland, the President has called for action to declare
Poland a beneficiary country under the U.S. Generalized
System of Preferences (GSP) program.
o
The GSP program allows 4,100 products from
GSP-beneficiary countries to enter the United
States duty-free.
a
Duty-free access to the United States will
provide a savings of hard currency reserves to
Poland.
o
Had it been GSP-eligible in 1988, Poland's trade
under the program would have totalled $73 million
dollars with a duty savings of $3.5 million.
Actions Taken
A bill has been introduced in Congress to remove
Poland from the list of countries explicitly listed as
ineligible for GSP.
o
The list of ineligible countries includes a
number of Western and Eastern nations.
Next Steps
The Administration has begun its review of the
so-called mandatory eligibility criteria for Poland that
must be satisfied before GSP-elibility is conferred. These
criteria are detailed in section 502(b) (1-7) of the Trade
Act of 1974, as amended.
These reviews require a public comment period,
and comments on Poland have already been
received. All comments to date have been in
support of this initiative.
0
An Administration determination on the criteria
will be made at the end of this process and this
determination, when forwarded to the Congress,
will serve as formal notification of the
President's intent to designate Poland as a
GSP-beneficiary.
o
Upon such notification, Washington-based GSP
experts will travel to Poland to provide
on how to quickly and effectively maximize use of
officials and exporters with instructions/advice
the U.S. GSP program.
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
(Narsaw, Poland)
For Immediate Release
July 9, 1989
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
UPON ARRIVAL IN POLAND
Warsaw Airport
i Warsaw, Poland
10:25 P.M. (L)
THE PRESIDENT: Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your
hospitable and gracious words of welcome. To you and to the people
of Poland -- friends and cousins of so many in my homeland -- we
extend the heartfelt best wishes of the American people. And here in
the heart of Europe, the American people have a fervent wish -- that
Europe be whole and free.
In my first moments as President, I told my countrymen
that a new breeze was blowing across the world. And the winds of
change have surely touched the land here, where so much has happened
since my last visit.
It is wonderful to be back at such in exciting time.
History -- which has so often conspired with geography to deny the
Polish people their freedom -- now offers up a new and brighter
future for Poland.
I listened carefully, sir, to your words of welcome and,
yes, Poland has started along an ascending path of change --
democratic change. And this climb is exhilarating, but not always
easy, and will require further sacrifices. But, if followed, it will
lead to a renaissance for this remarkable nation.
These are great days for Poland. Solidarity is legal.
The beginnings of a free;press now exist. A new Parliament is in
place. The Polish Senate has been restored through free and fair
elections. And Poland is making its own history. And America -- and
the whole world -- is watching.
The government of Poland and you, Mr. Chairman, have
shown wisdom and courage in taking the path of those Roundtable
Accords. And the world is inspired by what is happening here.
Mr. Chairman, we do look forward to our talks with you
and other representatives of the Polish government -- with the
democratic opposition, as well. While in your country, I want to
hear the many voices of the people of Poland.
And as we begin these discussions, I carry with me many
happy memories of my first visit to Poland. And my thoughts turn on
this Sunday to the memory of another Sunday outside Warsaw, when we
attended morning mass at St, Margaret's Church in Lomianki. The
cracks of her historic walls were filled with flowers and the church
itself was filled to overflowing with your countrymen, their devoted
faces touched by tears of joy.
And it reminds me of other churches that I've visited
since that morning at St. Margaret's. Churches like St. Adalbert's
in Philadelphia, St. Hyacinth's in Chicago. Churches built by Polish
hands and nurtured by Polish dreams. In America -- and in Poland --
those dreams are as ancient and as fundamental as the courageous
spirit of the Polish people.
And as we meet this evening in Warsaw, the sun still
as
MORE
- 2 -
shines on those churches across the sea. There is -- it's still
Sunday afternoon there, and America's churches are filled with people
in prayer. And as we begin these discussions -- and as your country
continues its hard journey up the path it has chosen -- my prayers
and the prayers of the American people remain with Poland, as they
have throughout its long struggle:
And, yes, there is a good deal of work to be done, and we
will work together to gain new ground, to expand our common ground
and U.S.-Polish ties.
So thank you again, sir, for this warm welcome. Rest
well on this Sunday night. And long live Poland. Thank you very
much. (Applause.)
END
10:35 P.M. (L)
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
(Budapest, Hungary)
MBARGOED FOR RELEASE
INTIL 1:30 P.M. (L)
7:30 A.M. EDT
TEDNESDAY, JULY 12, 1989
FACT SHEET
A PROGRAM IN SUPPORT OF HUNGARIAN REFORM
Hungary has entered a period of dynamic political and
economic change. President Bush announced several measures
to support Hungary's already considerable efforts to
develop private enterprise and a freer political system.
0
Concerted Western Action. The President is
proposing concerted action by the U.S., West
European and Japanese governments in support of
Hungarian economic reform and recovery. This will
be a major topic at the Paris Summit.
Hungarian-American Enterprise Fund. The President
proposes establishment of an Enterprise Fund, with
a grant of $25 million, to help the Hungarians
expand their private sector, already one of the
most extensive in East Central Europe.
Most-Favored-Nation Status. The President has
announced his intention to grant Hungary
most-favored-nation status, without the
requirement of annual waivers, as soon as Hungary
passes its new emigration law. This new law will
satisfy the free emigration requirements of the
Jackson-Vanik amendment. Hungary would thus become
the first Warsaw Pact country deemed to be in full
compliance with Jackson-Vanik.
o
Environmental Initiative. President Bush has made
environmental policy a cornerstone of his plan for
assisting East European reform. The President
will ask Congress to provide $5 million for the
establishment of a regional environmental center
in Budapest. The canter will bring together
private and governmental experts and organizations
to address ecological issues.
o
Exchanges. The President has announced a
substantial expansion of exchange programs in
Hungary and elsewhere in the region. USIA has
identified $6.1 million for these new programs.
o
Science and Technology (S&T) Agreement. The
President has announced the U.S. intention to
conclude an umbrella S&T agreement with Hungary.
We envision a broad program of scientific and
technological cooperation in such areas of joint
interest and expertise as basic sciences, the
environment, agriculture, medicine, energy, and
nuclear safety.
o
Peace Corps. The President has announced the
establishment of a Peace Corps program in Hungary,
and expand English language teaching.
centered on assisting Hungarian efforts to develop
2
CONCERTED WESTERN ACTION FOR HUNGARY AND POLAND
Proposal
The President is proposing that nations of the Summit
Seven intensify their concerted action to support economic
:eforms based on political pluralism in Hungary and
Poland. Complementary efforts by leading industrial
iemocracies will provide a powerful impetus to economic
recovery and progress in these nations as they face a
turning point. Other interested countries could contribute
to this process as well.
icope
Efforts will involve work with the Hungarian and Polish
jovernments, and with other official and independent
organizations in those countries, to gather information and
provide feedback on issues of mutual concern. Involved
overnments will also work as appropriate with
representatives of the IMF, World Bank, EC Commission and
other multilateral and private sector institutions.
Specific issues addressed could include:
Needed economic reforms;
Timing and conditions for new credits; and
Concrete support for privatization and private
business, environmental projects, management and
training initiatives, social safety nets to
accompany restructuring, housing, etc.
These efforts would not undercut or replace existing
institutions such as the World Bank, Paris Club or IMF.
ext Steps
The President will discuss this proposal in Paris with
he leaders of the other Summit Seven nations -- the UK,
RG, France, Japan, Italy and Canada.
- more -
3
HUNGARIAN-AMERICAN ENTERPRISE FUND
rocosal
he rivate sector which can produce wealth that will benefit
Hungary has taken a number of steps to enlarge its
nd entire nation. At the President's initiative, the U.S.
rovide $25 million for this initiative.
nterprise Fund." The President is asking Congress to
Hungary will jointly establish a "Hungarian-American
urpose
rivate sector in Hungary. It will be empowered to
The Fund will support the development of the growing
proved projects, including:
isburse hard currency loans or venture capital grants for
0
Private sector development (business loans/grants,
possible establishment of a private sector
development bank);
o
Privatization of state firms (e.g., provide
funding for entrepreneurs to buy into state
firms) ;
o
Technical assistance or training programs in
support of or run by Hungary's private sector;
private; Funding of export projects partly or wholly
o
Joint Ventures between private Hungarian and
American investors (e.g., encourage participation
of private Hungarian firms in joint ventures).
- more -
4
HUNGARY: MOST-FAVORED-NATION STATUS
oposal
The President has announced that upon enactment of
e form the Congress that Hungary is in full compliance with
W law on emigration by the Hungarian Parliament, he will the
11 Jackson-Vanik Amendment to the 1974 Trade Act. Hungary
atus for the maximum period allowable under our
be eligible to receive most-favored-nation (MFN)
gislation, without any need of annual waivers.
skaround
On June 26, 1989 Hungary's Council of Ministers
omitted to the Hungarian Parliament for adoption. The
proved the final draft of a new law on emigration to be
proved draft incorporates the provisions considered
:tion 402 of the Jackson-Vanik Amendment.
cessary to satisfy the free emigration requirements of
Under the Jackson-Vanik amendment to the Trade Act
'4, the President is empowered to waive the prohibition of
the granting of most-favored-nation (MFN) tariff
atment to a country which substantially restricts
ndment. gration, if such a waiver would further the goals of the
0
The President has taken this step annually with
respect to Hungary since 1978.
o
Hungary is now approaching total compliance with
the provisions of the Jackson-Vanik amendment.
o
have legalized and implemented free emigration,
Hungary will be the first Warsaw Pact country to
thus satisfying the requirements of Jackson-Vanik.
- more -
5
A REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL CENTER
LOCATED IN BUDAPEST
Proposal
The President has proposed the establishment of a $5 million
regional environmental center, located in Budapest. This is a
ubstantive follow up to the President's initiative in Mainz to
roblems. elp Eastern and Central Europe overcome its environmental
urpose
The Center will provide a facility for cooperative research
nd activities between governmental and nongovernmental experts
nd public interest groups from the United States, Western Europe
nd Eastern Europe concerned with the environment including
nergy and nuclear safety.
cope
oth private and governmental funds. It would focus on
The Center would be an independent organization supported by
leveloping the broadest human resource base for comprehensive
region. :nvironmental improvement and protection activities in the
0
The Center would facilitate loans of lab equipment and
organize workshops and other exchanges.
0
Specific emphasis would be placed on:
:
Trans-boundary pollution problems;
:
Toxic waste disposal;
:
Alternative sources of non-polluting energy; and
--
practices. Promotion of nuclear safety technology and
O
Although located in or near Budapest, the Center's
objective would be to attract funding and direct
participation by both governmental and private entities
and groups from East and West.
- more -
6
EXCHANGES WITH EAST-CENTRAL EUROPE
Troposal
The President has called for expanded and imaginative
exchange initiatives. USIA will allocate up to $6.1 million
'rom 1990 resources in order to implement this new initiative to
trengthen the trends toward democratic values and institutions
through significantly expanded academic, cultural, and
eople-to-people contacts.
The principal emphasis of this initiative will be in Hungary
and Poland, but other countries in the region will also be
nvolved. Hundreds will participate in the new
fovernment-sponsored ear. exchanges in both directions over the next
The initiative has the following elements:
Political. Social and Legal Institutions
o
The John Marshall Study Program in the Rule of Law.
Visits to the U.S. by more than 50 legal scholars,
judicial and parliamentary officials to examine the
U.S. jurisprudence and legislative system;
0
Visits by Congressional experts to consult with new
democratic legislatures in Hungary and Poland;
Consultations for representatives of East-Central
European political parties with U.S. party
organizations to learn the mechanics of democratic
electoral politics;
Samuel Gompers Labor Leader Exchanges. Travel and
study programs for trade unionists in the U.S.;
0
Translation and distribution of up to 100,000 books,
magazines, and videocassettes in local languages on the
U.S. political and economic system;
0
Placement of U.S. specialists in law and public
administration at East-Central European academic
institutions; and
- more -
7
Visits to the U.S. by East-Central European
"future leaders" under the age of 30.
Approximately 100 participants are projected for
this program.
ee Market Initiative
o
Alexander Hamilton Fellowships in Management.
Internships, educational, and training programs
for at least 50 entrepreneurs and enterprise
managers.
o
Consulting visits by U.S. executives and
management specialists to advise private and
cooperative enterprises.
o
Support of management training programs and
institutes through U.S. instructors, curriculum
materials, and short-term seminars. Hundreds of
East-Central European management specialists would
benefit from this expanded effort.
lucational and Youth Exchange
0
Establishment of Noah Webster Chairs in American
Language and Literature at Central and Eastern
European universities.
Citizen Exchange Initiative. Assistance to the
U.S. private sector in developing youth and other
people-to-people exchange activities in Eastern
and Central Europe. Several hundred American and
European citizens would be involved in this
intensified two-way exchange initiative.
nvironmental Protection and Cultural Preservation
0
Two-way exchanges with specialists in the fields
of environmental protection and cultural
preservation.
8
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (S&T) AGREEMENT WITH HUNGARY
Scope
The President has announced the U.S. intention to
conclude an umbrella S&T agreement with Hungary. We
envision a broad program of scientific and technological
cooperation in such areas of joint interest and expertise
is basic sciences, the environment, agriculture, medicine,
energy, geology and nuclear safety.
Purpose
The agreement would develop and implement high-quality
cooperative research programs.
o
S&T cooperation recognizes Hungary's first rate
scientific establishment.
o
The agreement also complements the President's
Eastern European Environmental Initiative by
coordinating research activities, providing core
funds, and encouraging contacts in the
environmental area.
lext Steps
We expect to send a technical delegation to Hungary
shortly to negotiate the final terms of the agreement and
work out detailed arrangements for funding.
unding
Annual contributions of approximately $1 million or
the equivalent in Hungarian currency from each side would
implement the agreement.
o
The U.S. can expect reasonable and tangible
returns that far exceed U.S. costs because such
core money often returns much larger dividends in
terms of scientific innovations and by
stimulating additional funding by participating
technical agencies.
0
This program will complement other existing and
valuable U.S. S&T programs with Poland and
Yugoslavia.
- more -
Э
UNITED STATES PEACE CORPS/HUNGARY
The Program
agreed in principle to establish a Peace Corps program,
The United States and the Government of Hungary have
expand English language teaching.
centered on assisting Hungarian efforts to develop and
o
The Peace Corps entry into Hungary represents a
new era for American volunteers serving overseas.
The Hungarian program, which could begin as early
as the fall of 1989 with training for assignment
in early 1990, eventually will involve teaching
counties. English in Budapest and all 19 of the country's
The Volunteers
Hungary will be the first European country where U.S.
65 nations in the Americas, Africa, Asia and the Pacific.
There are now nearly 6,000, volunteers and trainees in
volunteers are assigned.
o
Around the world, these Peace Corps volunteers
maternal and child health, family nutrition, fresh
offer skills in a wide variety of programs: e.g.,
water fisheries, agriculture extension, teacher
training, small business consulting, public
administration, natural resource development,
energy, engineering, and industrial arts.
A volunteer must be a U.S. citizen at least 18
years old. There is no upper age limit, and
currently, nearly 500 volunteers are over 50.
Training
strong emphasis will be placed on learning Hungarian.
training within Hungary before being assigned to schools.
All volunteers will receive language and cultural
social Cultural studies include Hungary's history, customs, and
and political systems.
# # #
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
(Gdansk, Poland)
For Immediate Release
July 11, 1989
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
AT SOLIDARITY WORKERS' MONUMENT
Lenin Shipyard Gates
Gdansk, Poland
2:32 P.M. (L)
what hello you've Solidarnosc; hello Polska. (Applause.) And Lech Walesa, on
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you very much. Hello
modern Polska. done (Applause.) since I last visited -- the first free congratulations elections in
we in my feel heart. And when you hurt, we feel pain. And when heart and
Poland has a special place in the American --
diplomatic hope. And when you succeed, we feel joy. It you far dream,
to Poland relations -- it's more like family relations. goes And coming beyond
is like coming home. (Applause.)
than liberty," a wrote a Byzantine historian about the Slavic are accustomed more
-- to a recurring dream -- the dream of freedom. "They dream
This special kinship is the kinship of an ancient
would conveyed not across die. the centuries and across the oceans -- a dream been that
thousand years ago. And the spirit of the Poles has people
harbor years ago this summer, the pre-dawn quiet of this Fifty
That dream was severely tested here in Gdansk.
warship across Schleswig-Holstein. Within the hour, iron guns Nazi
was shattered by the thunder from the 15-inch peaceful of Baltic
that the Polish frontier. And Europe was plunged pansers into darkness rolled
would engulf the world.
or followed, resist against impossible odds. And in the brutal fighting tyranny that
For Poland the choices were few: Surrender to --
except her honor, except her dreams.
forgotten. (Applause.) In World War II Poland lost never everything be --
you set a standard for courage that will
saved Nazi's secret coding machine. Breaking the "unbreakable" the
Before Poland fell, you gave the allies "Enigma" --
for this tens of thousands of allied lives -- of American lives Axis codes and
major role And, ultimately, Enigma and freedom fighters people, played a
(Applause.) you have the enduring gratitude of the American --
in winning the Second World War.
Cold the dream War brought a long and chilly night of sorrow and darkness. hardship. And The
But for you, the war's end did not end the
was again denied.
And In the a summer of 1980, you occupied the shipyards where
And yet, there were glimmers of the long-awaited dawn.
emerged patriotic electrician clambered over these iron gates we stand. - and
(Applause.) as one of the heroes of our times -- Lech Walesa.
tradition of our own Statue of Liberty -- to become a symbol rose
And above your streets a graceful monument -- in the
recognized around the world as a beacon of hope.
But the hope -- like the dawn -- proved fleeting. For
MORE
- 2 -
movement under cover of darkness, the electrician was arrested and
nation outlawed. And in the icy cold of a savage winter, your a modern
was sealed off from the outside world. (Applause.)
your darkness, candles appeared in silent protest, lighting wintry the of
But still the dream would not die. In the
world villages, of your cities. And as the years unfolded and windows
-- turned watched in wonder, you -- the Polish people -- and your leaders as the
(Applause.) despair into hope -- turned darkness into dreams.
and resurrection as a state in 1918. Against enormous odds, confidence
Hope and hard work were the foundation of Poland's
determination made that dream a reality. And these
time qualities have brought you to this new crossroads in history. same
responsibilities. It is Poland's time of destiny. (Applause.)
has come. It is Poland's time of possibilities. It's time Your of
Polish people. And the first fruits of democracy -- elections. At
Productive negotiations between the government of Poland and the
A time when dreams can live again. Solidarity reborn.
tested, a great American President spoke eloquently about the
another time, in another city where the human spirit was being
of that struggle.
struggle for liberty. Today the world watches the inevitable outcome
Today to those who think that hopes can be forever
suppressed, I say, let them look at Poland. (Applause.)
say, let them look at Poland.
To those who think that freedom can be forever denied, I
And to those who think that dreams can be forever
alive. (Applause.)
repressed, I say, let at Poland. For here in Poland, the dream is
Yes, today the brave workers of Gdansk stand beside this
monument as a beacon of hope, a symbol of that dream. And the brave
workers (Applause.) of Gdansk know Poland is not alone. America stands with you.
THE AUDIENCE: President Bush. President Bush.
President Bush.
THE PRESIDENT: Because Americans are so free to dream,
we feel a special kinship with those who dream of a better future.
Here in Poland, the United States supports the Roundtable Accords,
and applauds the wisdom, tenacity and patience of one of Poland's
great leaders -- Lech Walesa. (Applause.) And again --
THE AUDIENCE: Lech Walesa. Lech Walesa. Lech Walesa.
THE PRESIDENT: And we cheer a movement that has touched
the imagination of the world. That movement is Solidarnosc. And we
applaud those who have made this progress possible -- the Polish
people. (Applause.) We recognize, too, that the Polish government
historic steps.
has shown wisdom and creativity and courage in proceeding with these
Poles and Americans share a commitment to overcome the
of men and women throughout the world. Poles and Americans want
division of Europe and to redeem the promise that is the birthright
Europe to be whole and free. (Applause.)
The Roundtable provisions -- as they continue to be carried out --
A more democratic Poland can be a more prosperous Poland.
a better life.
can liberate the energy of a dynamic people to work together to build
We understand the legacy of distrust and shattered dreams
of as Poles of all political complexions travel together down the path
negotiation and compromise. Your challenge is to rise above
MORE
- 3 -
purpose. distrust and bring the Polish people together toward a common
take freely-elected to assist Senate -- I outlined steps that America is prepared your to
Speaking before the new Parliament and the Senate --
Poland as you move forward on the path of reform.
not have already been the lot of the Polish people. And hard hardship
It will not be easy. Sacrifice and economic
determination. benefits are realized. And it requires
before yet the at an end. Economic reform requires hard work and times restraint are
and have But the Polish people are no strangers patience to hard and work,
taught the world about determination.
for your children. -- You can see a new and prosperous Poland. you
So I say follow your dream of a better life for and
your lifetime. (Applause.)
overnight not in a year. But yes, a new and prosperous Poland Not in
new immigrants life came to that magical place called "America" Hopeful -- and a
It has been done by Polish people before.
by for themselves in a single generation. And it built done
(Applause.) Polish people again. But this time, it will be done can in Poland. be
beautiful if Oval Office in the White House by one of your journalists my
Just before I left a few days ago, I was asked in
I I would leave Poland and go to America, were I a Pole. And
answered that in this time of bright promise, of historic young
be transition, of unique opportunity, I would want to stay in Poland and
people. (Applause.)
a part of it, help make the dream come true for all the Polish
The magic of America --
Bush.
AUDIENCE: President Bush. President Bush. President
majesty of her land, and yes, our country has been blessed. But
THE PRESIDENT: The magic of America is not found in the
Poland, too, is a land of natural beauty -- ample timber and ore and
creative people that is determined to succeed.
water and coal -- abundant agriculture potential -- and a talented,
in my first moments as President of the United States.
No, the magic of America is in an idea. I described it
"We know what works: Freedom works. We know what's
just and prosperous land for man on Earth."
right: Freedom is right. (Applause.) We know how to secure a more
And today, you can rediscover a new land -- a land of
proud. your dreams -- a land of your own making. A Poland, strong and
Poland is where World War II began. And Poland is where
where we can work to end the division of Europe.
-- and why - the Cold War got started. And it is here, in Poland,
I can think of no finer or more capable people with whom to entrust
It is in your power to help end the division of Europe.
this mission. And just as a son of Poland has shown the world the
Poland can show the world what a free people with commitment and
heights of spiritual leadership in the Vatican, so the people of
energy can accomplish. (Applause.)
A new century is almost upon us. It is alive with
possibilities. And in your quest for a better future for yourselves
airport -- in that quest America stands shoulder-to-shoulder with the
and for those wonderful children that I saw coming in from the
Polish people in solidarity. (Applause.)
MORE
- 4 -
dream idea whose is alive. time has come. The dream is a Poland reborn, can and stop the
Americans and Poles both know that nothing an
Good-bye, I came here to assure you we will help Poland.
Poland is not lost while Poles still live. (Applause.)
Poland. God bless you, and God save this wonderful (Applause.) country of
(Applause.)
END
2:53 P.M. (L)
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
November 1, 1989
STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT
When President Barco of Colombia visited me September 28, I
promised to examine what the United States could do to expand
economic cooperation between our two countries. I directed the
United States Trade Representative, Carla Hills, to lead a United
States Government interagency effort to develop a package of
trade initiatives that will contribute to the Administration's
war on drugs.
Today I am announcing the result of that effort. The package of
trade initiatives described below is designed to create
opportunities for expanded trade and investment between the
countries of the Andean region and the United States. Given the
regional nature of the drug problem, I have decided to offer
these trade initiatives to the countries in the Andean region.
In creating such opportunities, this package aims to encourage
and support fundamental economic reform in the countries of the
region on the basis of market-driven policies.
I believe that through increased trade we can make a contribution
to the creation of economic alternatives to drug trafficking.
Healthy economies are the only lasting solution for eliminating
the drug trade and substituting legitimate trade. They also
offer the potential for increased United States exports and
investment. Our goal must be to help create an environment where
entrepreneurship can flourish and comparative advantages can be
successfully pursued in competitive world markets.
with regard to bilateral and regional initiatives, we are
prepared to:
-
do all that we can to enhance the benefits the
countries of the region enjoy under our Generalized
System of Preferences, including a review, to begin
immediately, to consider the addition of new products,
both agricultural and industrial, to the program;
- more -
-2-
-
undertake appropriate technical assistance to help the
Andean countries improve their trade performance in
industrial as well as agricultural products, and urge
the multilateral institutions to do the same; and
-
after consulting with the affected parties, explore
possibilities for expanding textiles trade consistent
with current United States Government policies and
programs and the Multifiber Arrangement.
In the multilateral arena we are proposing to:
-
build on the political consensus to negotiate a new
International Coffee Agreement that corrects the
fundamental problems with the previous agreement;
-
undertake an accelerated negotiation on tariffs and
non-tariff measures with participants in the Uruguay
Round;
-
consult with our major trading partners (Canada, the
EC, and Japan) to determine areas in which we can help
the Andean countries improve their trade performance;
and
-
support the multilateral development banks in their
efforts to work with the Andean countries to promote
meaningful trade policy reforms in the Andean
countries.
In order to ensure that these initiatives are implemented quickly
and efficiently, the Office of the United States Trade
Representative is heading up an interagency Andean Trade Task
Force to manage the process and to consider additional ideas for
strengthening our cooperation with the Andean countries.
###
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
November 1, 1989
FACT SHEET
Andean Trade Package
I.
BILATERAL AND REGIONAL INITIATIVES
A.
Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) :
1.
Suggest that the Governments of Venezuela and
Ecuador initiate the exchange of letters which
would provide those countries with GSP for six
categories of handicraft textiles. These
categories are USHTS 5701.10.1300, 5702.10.1000,
5702.91.2000, 5805.00.2000, 6304.99.1000, and
6304.99.4000.
2.
For Bolivia, Colombia, Peru, and Ecuador:
Accelerate implementation of any GSP benefits as a
normal part of the 1989 GSP Annual Review. This
includes product petitions now under review as
well as product redesignations.
3.
For Bolivia, Colombia, Peru, and Ecuador: Offer
the opportunity to submit new GSP petitions as
soon as is practical, and review these on an
expedited basis. Petitions would be due
January 15, 1990, with results announced July 15
and implemented August 1.
4.
Provide GSP technical seminars to assist Andean
countries to expand their use of GSP petitions.
We would also consider providing technical
seminars and technical advice beyond 1990.
B.
Technical Assistance to Help the Andean Countries
Improve Their Trade Performance: U.S. Government
agencies determine what technical assistance could be
provided to the countries of the region. We will also
encourage the multilateral development banks to
undertake the same assistance.
C.
Textiles: After consulting with all affected parties,
explore possibilities for expanding textiles trade
consistent with current U.S. Government policies and
programs and the Multifiber Arrangement.
-MORE -
- 2 -
II. MULTILATERAL INITIATIVES
A.
International Coffee Agreement: Build on the recently-
achieved multilateral political consensus to negotiate
a new International Coffee Agreement.
B. Accelerated Uruguay Round Tariff Negotiations:
Undertake an accelerated negotiation on tariffs and
non-tariff measures with Andean participants in the
Uruguay Round.
C.
U.S. Consultations with Canada, the EC and Japan:
Consult with out major trading partners to determine
areas in which we can cooperate to assist the Andean
countries improve their trade performance. We will be
raising this at the upcoming meeting on the Uruguay
Round of the Trade Ministers of the Quadrilateral
countries (i.e., U.S., Canada, and Japan) which begins
on November 12.
D.
Support the Multilateral Development Banks' Efforts to
Encourage Meaningful Trade Policy Reforms: Consult
with the multilateral development banks to support
their efforts to work with the Andean countries to
promote meaningful trade policy reforms.
# # #
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
November 9, 1989
STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT
AND QUESTION AND ANSWER SESSION
The Oval Office
3:34 P.M. EST
THE PRESIDENT: We just wanted to make a brief statement
here. I've just been briefed by the Secretary of State and my
National Security Advisor on the latest news coming out of Germany.
And, of course, I welcome the decision by the East German leadership
to open the borders to those wishing to emigrate or travel. And
this, if it's implemented fully, certainly conforms with the Helsinki
Accords -- Helsinki Final Act, which the GDR signed.
And if the GDR goes forward now, this wall built in '61
will have very little relevance. And it clearly is a good
development in terms of human rights. And I must say that after
discussing this here with the Secretary of State and the National
Security Advisor, I am very pleased with this development.
Q
Mr. President, would the United States now consider
doing more to help West Germany house, to take care of some of these
East Germans coming into that country? Is there more that you could
do now to help West Germany accommodate --
THE PRESIDENT: Well, we have such a close relationship
with the Federal Republic that if we're -- Chancellor Kohl asks us to
be of some assistance, I'm certain we would give it serious
consideration. I mean, I don't know what it is they'd have in mind,
because I think with a truly open border, it is hard to predict how
many will be trying to leave. And so it's a dynamic development, and
we just have to wait and see. But our relationship with the Federal
Republic is such that we would want to be of the maximum help if it
was needed. So far, Germany has done a magnificent job in handling
those who have preceeded -- this new exodus.
0
Have you assured Mr. Kohl that if he does need help
that we'll be there for them?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I haven't talked to him, Lesley,
since this development because he just went off to Poland. I talked
to him about this last week and made very clear to him that we
thought -- I think it was last week -- made very clear to him that we
thought they were handling it with great sensitivity. It's an
enormous burden on the Federal Republic, and I don't remember in that
conversation if I said if we can be of any help, please let me know,
but I'm sure he knows that's the case.
Q
Did he give any indication of how far he'd be able
to go to accommodate this influx of refugees? I think the number
stands at about 110,000 now. Did he say if it hits a million we're
going to have real problems?
THE PRESIDENT: No, he didn't go into numbers at all, but
he demonstrates a quiet confidence that the Federal Republic can
cope. As I say, they have done a good job. And here's a new
development in this rapidly-changing part of the world that we can
salute. And it's a dramatic happening for East Germany, and of
course for freedom.
MORE
- 2 -
Q
Is this the end of the Iron Curtain, sir?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I don't think any single event is
the end of what you might call the Iron Curtain, but clearly this is
a long way from the harsh days of the -- the harshest Iron Curtain
days -- a long way from that.
Q Mr. President, what do you think the implications
are for the Warsaw Pact now? I mean, can we say that this may be an
indication that they're headed toward a loosening or even a
dismantling of the Warsaw Pact?
THE PRESIDENT: I think you have to say what you mean by
Warsaw Pact. I mean, it seems to me that it's certainly a loosening
up in terms of travel. It concurs with the Helsinki Final Act, and
it is a very good development.
Our objective is a Europe whole and free. And is it a
step towards that? I would say yes. Gorbachev talks about a common
home. Is it a step towards that? Probably SO.
Q
Mr. President, what's the danger --
Q
What do you think the implications are for our --
for emigration to this country, Mr. President? Do you think we'll be
seeing very many of these new refugees?
THE PRESIDENT: There's no indication of that. These are
Germans going to the Federal Republic of Germany.
Q
What's the danger here of events just spinning out
of control? Secretary Baker commented earlier about how rapid the
pace of change has been in Eastern Europe. Nobody really expected
this to happen as quickly as it did. Is there a danger here that
things are accelerating too quickly?
THE PRESIDENT: I wouldn't want to say this kind of
development makes things to be moving too quickly at all. It's the
kind of development that we have long encouraged by our strong
support for the Helsinki Final Act. So I'm not going to hypothecate
that it may -- anything goes too fast.
Q
So you don't see --
THE PRESIDENT: But we are handling it in a way where we
are not trying to give anybody a hard time. We're saluting those who
can move forward with democracy. We are encouraging the concept of a
Europe whole and free, and so we just welcome it. But I don't like
to go into a lot of hypotheses about too much change or too rapid
change or what I'd do, what our whole team here would do if something
went wrong. I think it's been handled by the West very well, and
certainly we salute the people in East Germany, the GDR, whose
aspirations for freedom seem to be a little further down the road
now.
Q
Mr. President, do you think now that East Germany
appears to be moving in the direction of Poland and Hungary that the
rest of the Eastern Bloc can continue to resist this? I'm thinking
of Czechlosovakia, Bulgaria, Romania? will they be the next?
THE PRESIDENT: No, I don't think anyone can resist it --
in Europe or in the Western Hemisphere.
Q
Did you ever imagine --
THE PRESIDENT: That's one of the great things about
dynamic change in Central America -- moving in our direction.
Q
Did you ever imagine anything like this happening?
or
On your watch?
MORE
- 3 -
THE PRESIDENT: We've imagined it, but I can't say that I
foresaw this development at this stage. Now I didn't foresee it.
But imagining it, yes. When I talk about.a Europe whole and free,
we're talking about this kind of freedom to come and go, this kind of
staying with and living by the Helsinki Final Act, which gives the
people the rights to come and go.
Q
In what you just said, that this is a sort of great
victory for our side in the big East-West battle -- but you don't
seem elated. And I'm wondering if you're thinking of the problems.
THE PRESIDENT: I am not an emotional kind of guy.
Q Well, how elated are you?
THE PRESIDENT: I'm very pleased. And I've been very
pleased with a lot of other developments. And, as I've told you, I
think the United States' part of this, which is not related to this
development today particularly, is being handled in a proper fashion.
And we'll have some that'll suggest more flamboyant courses of action
for this country, and we're, I think, handling this properly with
allies, staying in close touch in this dynamic change. Try to help
as development takes place, try to enhance reform, both political and
economic.
And so, the fact that I'm not bubbling over, maybe it's
getting along towards evening, because I feel very good about it.
Q Well, what I wanted to ask is the second part of
that was, is your second thought -- what are we going to do if it
really does explode over there -- coming into play here? I mean,
obviously, if they just flood into West Germany, they're handling it
now, but they've only gotten 200,000. What if they get a million?
What if they get 2 million?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, what I'd like to think is that the
political change in the GDR would catch up very fast with this
liberation, if you will. You may remember that, before I went to
Poland, I think -- I don't know whether Jim Baker was sitting next to
me. I know Brent was there and John Sununu. And I was asked by a
Polish journalist if I were a young Pole, what would my advice be.
And what I said is, I think you ought to stay there and participate
in this dramatic change in your country. You ought to feel the surge
of freedom, feel the move toward democracy and be a part of it.
These are Germans. And Germans love their country. And
at some point, I think a lot of Germans who had felt pent in and
unable to move are going to say, look, we can move. But wouldn't it
be better to participate in the reforms that are taking place in our
own country?
So I think it's too early to predict that because these
openings are there that that means everybody is going to take off.
Q
Do you think this will give you a stronger position
when you go on the ship next month and you're talking to President
Gorbachev? I mean, that your side is winning? I mean, is that the
kind of thing you're going to communicate to him? Are you going to
say the --
THE PRESIDENT: He's already expressed his interest in a
common European home. We've phrased it differently. We've said a
Europe whole and free. And when you see citizens wanting to go and
flee what has been an oppressive society, clearly that is a message
that Mr. Gorbachev will understand. He sees it not only in Eastern
Europe, but he sees it inside the Soviet Union. And SO we'll have a
good, lively -- before, these developments took place, I have said
that we would be discussing the rapid change inside Eastern Europe.
And we've been talking about that today, just before you all came in
here. We've been talking about the Gorbachev meeting. And one of
the things that we are determined we will discuss -- and I know he'll
want to discuss -- is this change.
MORE
- 4 -
Q
Mr. President, are you saying you think maybe East
Germans will want to stay and participate in reforming their country.
That suggests you think German reunification is some ways off. What
is your view on German reunification? Does this bring it closer?
THE PRESIDENT: I don't see the -- I don't know. I think
it's way too early to speak on that. I've spoken out on the question
of German reunification. I notice the President of France, President
Mitterrand, spoke out. I've heard what Chancellor Kohl has had to
say about it. But Michael, I don't know whether the development of
today speeds up the day or not.
Q
Mr. President, will you consider lifting
Jackson-Vanik restrictions on East Germany?
THE PRESIDENT: I will be discussing a wide array of
those subjects with the Soviets, I'm sure, including -- I know of
their interest in talking about that, so we'll be prepared to talk
about it.
Q
Are you going to be speaking to Chancellor Kohl in
the next couple of days?
THE PRESIDENT: I'd like to talk to him soon, but he's
off in Poland. I may try to get him there, but I talked to him quite
recently. We confer quite regularly.
Q
Do you talk to any of the other Western European --
Q
Will you try to reach Mitterrand?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, personally I don't know. We're in
-- again, I talked to him very recently, but he might want to talk
about it.
THE PRESS: Thank you.
END
3:47 P.M. EST
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
EMBARGOED FOR RELEASE
UNTIL 6:00 P.M. EST
MONDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 1989
TEXT OF REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
AT THE CEREMONY TO HONOR LECH WALESA
East Room
The White House
November 13, 1989
Just before Christmas, 1981, a darkness descended across Poland
for the third time this century. What had begun as a year of
hope and freedom ended in violence and repression.
In snow-filled crossroads and town squares across Poland, iron
tanks rumbled to a stop. Lech Walesa made the sign of the cross
on the foreheads of his sleeping children, and was taken away
into the night. Solidarity, a movement embracing the Polish
nation, was outlawed. Communications with the outside world were
cut off. And Poland awoke to snow and steel and silence, an
entire nation imprisoned.
But you can't lock up a dream. One by one, candles lit the
windows of Poland's farmhouses and tenements, silent beacons of
the liberty still burning in the hearts of a brave and ancient
people. And that Christmas Eve, not far from where we stand, a
candle burned all night in the White House, like others all
across America, glowing in solidarity with the Polish people.
When Spring came, a time of renewal and rebirth, Lech Walesa's
fate was still unknown. And as colleges and universities
approached graduation, one by one, again and again, the same two
names were heard. Lech Walesa. Solidarity.
Of course, Lech Walesa could not come to accept those honorary
degrees. And so in crowded assembly halls and packed arenas
across America, where every precious space was filled with proud
and loving families, stage after stage held a single, unfilled
place -- an empty chair, bearing only the Solidarity banner --
awaiting the release of Lech Walesa, and the liberation of the
Polish people.
We saw empty chairs in Maine and Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and
Illinois. At Notre Dame, the crowd stood for three minutes in
cheering tribute to the empty chair and the man who wasn't there.
At Holy Cross, Lane Kirkland accepted the award on Lech Walesa's
behalf. And back in Poland, in a humble wooden church on the
outskirts of Gdansk, an empty chair was placed near the altar for
the baptism of tiny Maria-Victoria, Lech's seventh child, a
little girl he had never seen.
For eight years, these empty chairs, and the American people,
have waited for you to come. We waited because we believe in
freedom. We waited because we believe in Poland. We waited
because we believe in you.
Today, the waiting is over. Today, Lech Walesa -- man of
freedom, is at the White House -- the house of freedom.
Lech Walesa, on behalf of the people of the United States, I am
proud to say to you today: "Take your place in this house of
freedom. Take your place in the empty chair."
- more -
- 2 -
In just a few days, you will be the second private citizen from
abroad in our history to ever address a Joint Meeting of Congress
-- after the Marquis de Lafayette in 1824.
Like him, you helped win an historic struggle. And like him, you
represent not only a people but also an idea -- an idea whose
time has come. And nothing can stop an idea whose time has come.
The idea is freedom. And the time is now.
You were called a "nobody." But Lenin and Stalin have been
disproved, not by Presidents or Princes, but by the likes of an
electrician from Gdansk and his fellow workers in a brave union
called Solidarity. The iron curtain is fast becoming a rusted,
abandoned relic, symbolizing a lost era and a failed ideology.
The change is everywhere. Poland. Hungary. Czechoslovakia.
And ladies and gentlemen -- the week that brought Lech Walesa to
America -- is the week the headlines proclaimed: "And The Wall
Comes Tumbling Down."
What's happening in Berlin, and on our television screens, is
astounding. World War II fought for freedom ironically left the
world divided between the free and the unfree. Most of us alive
today were born into that sundered world.
Now almost 50 years have passed. Some have wondered, all these
years, why we stayed in Berlin. Let me tell you. We stayed
because we knew we knew this day would come.
And now a century that was born in war and revolution may
bequeath a legacy of peace unthinkable only a few years ago.
The story of our times is the story of brave men and women who
seized a moment, who took a stand. Lech Walesa showed how one
individual could inspire in others a faith so powerful that it
vindicated itself, and changed the course of a nation. History
may make men, but Lech Walesa has made history.
And I believe history continues to be made, every day, by small,
daily acts of courage, by people who strive to make a difference.
Such people, says Lech, "are everywhere, in every factory, steel
mill, mine and shipyard, everywhere." And we've certainly seen
them in the American labor movement, where from the leadership of
Lane Kirkland to the rank and file across the Nation, they have
struggled in the vanguard of the free labor movement around the
world.
Our own humble electrician, Ben Franklin, declared that "Our '
cause is the cause of all mankind, for we are fighting for their
liberty in defending our own." And like Franklin -- who seized
lightning from the skies and brought it to Earth -- Lech Walesa
seized an idea -- a powerful idea -- and with it. electrified the
world. The idea is freedom. And the time is now.
Country by country, people by people, year by year, courageous
new voices are raised in a hundred languages -- in Spanish;
German; Chinese; and Russian. And yet, from these varied lips
comes a word all can understand. Freedom. As if with one voice
the people of the world have spoken. Freedom. In America, it is
our greatest natural resource, the secret of our success. And
freedom will bring success to Poland, too. American aid has
begun and more is coming. From Washington to Warsaw, from Kansas
City to Krakow, from Green Bay to Gdansk, Americans are linked in
spirit with the Polish people in their brave struggle for
opportunity, prosperity and freedom.
- more -
- 3 -
Lech Walesa, by your abiding faith, and by the miracle of
democracy's new birth in your homeland, you have come to
personify the new breeze that is sweeping the world East and
West, the spiritual godfather of a new generation of democracy.
Even while Solidarity was banned, your example, and the example
of the Polish people, was mirrored across Asia when "People
Power" became a chant, first in the Philippines, and then in
Pakistan, and South Korea, and yes, even in Tiananmen Square.
The whole world is watching. And the whole world is with you.
Thank you, Poland -- for showing us that the dream is alive.
Thank you, Poland, for showing us that a dream wrought by flesh
and blood cannot be stilled by walls of steel. Thank you,
Poland. And thank you, Lech Walesa.
And now, it is with great pride that I bestow the medal
previously awarded to the likes of Martin Luther King, John F.
Kennedy, Anwar Sadat and Mother Teresa. It is our Nation's
highest civilian honor. Let me read the citation.
To Lech Walesa, of Gdansk, Poland -- The Presidential Medal of
Freedom.
# # #
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
(Boston, Massachusetts)
For Immediate Release
May 21, 1989
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
AT BOSTON UNIVERSITY COMMENCEMENT CEREMONY
Boston University
Boston, Massachusetts
12:33 P.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you, President Silber. And
President and Madame Mitterrand, it's a great honor to have you here
today. And to Governor Dukakis, my respects -- the Chief Executive
of this great state and my friend as well. To Mayor Flynn, His
Eminence Cardinal Law, and Dr. Metcalf, Dr. Wiesel, and yes,
Kimberly, to you for that wonderful speech earlier on. And to Nancy
Joaquim, who rendered both The Marseillaise and The Star-Spangled
Banner in such fine way.
home states -- (laughter) -- and I am delighted and honored to
It's a pleasure to be back in Boston, back in one of my
receive a Doctor of Laws from Boston University along with President
Mitterrand. (Applause.) Doctor of Laws -- does this now make us a
Who knows?
couple of Boston lawyers, my friend, Mr. Mitterrand? (Laughter.)
I also would like to salute another most distinguished
visitor -- Prime Minister Mahathir of Malaysia -- a friend to the
United States, whose son is graduating today. We're honored to have
him here. (Applause.)
And I want to congratulate Barbara on a B.U. degree of
her very own. (Laughter and applause.) And now that you're an
alumna, take note -- this kinder and gentler America that I'm
speaking of does not always include the Terriers. (Laughter.)
My sincerest congratulations go to every Boston
University graduate, and to all you proud parents cooking out along
the 50-yard line there. (Laughter and applause.) And as Boston
University graduates, you take with you a degree from a great
institution, and something more -- (applause) -- something more --
knowledge of the past and responsibility for the future. And take a
look at our world today. Nations are undergoing changes so radical
that the international system you know and will know in the future
will be as different from today's, as today's world is from the time
of Woodrow Wilson. How will America prepare, then, for the
challenges ahead?
It's with your future in mind that, after deliberation
and a review, we are adapting our foreign policies to meet this
challenge. I've outlined how we're going to try to promote reform in
Eastern Europe; and how we're going to work with our friends in Latin
America. In Texas, I spoke to another group of graduates of our new
approach to the Soviet Union, one of moving beyond containment, to
seek to integrate the Soviets into the community of nations, to help
them share the rewards of international cooperation. (Applause.)
But today, I want to discuss the future of Europe, that
mother of nations and ideas that is so much a part of America. And
it is fitting that I share this forum with a very special friend of
the United States -- President Mitterrand, you have the warm
affection and high regard of the American people. (Applause.) And I
remember well about eight years ago when you joined us in Yorktown in
MORE
2 -
1981 to celebrate the bicentennial of that first Franco-American
fight for freedom. And soon, I will join you in Paris, sir, to
observe the 200th anniversary of the French struggle for liberty and
equality. (Applause.)
And this is just one example of the special bond between
two continents. But consider this city. From the Old North Church
to Paul Revere's home nestled in the warm heart of the Italian North
End, to your famous song-filled Irish pubs -- the Old and New Worlds
are inseparable in this city. But as we look back to Old World
tradition, we must look ahead to a new Europe. Historic changes will
shape your careers and your very lives.
The changes that are occurring in Western Europe are less
dramatic than those taking place in the East, but they are no less
fundamental. The postwar order that began in 1945 is transforming
into something very different. And yet certain essentials remain,
because our Alliance with Western Europe is utterly unlike the
cynical power alliances of the past. It is based on far more than
the perception of a common enemy. It is a tie of culture and kinship
and shared values. And as we look toward the 21st century, Americans
and Europeans alike should remember the words of Raymond Aron, who
called the Alliance a "moral and spiritual community." Our ideals
are those of the American Bill of Rights and the French Declaration
of the Rights of Man. And it is precisely because the ideals of this
community are universal that the world is in ferment today.
And as you know, the nations of Western Europe are already moving
Now a new century holds the promise of a united Europe.
toward greater economic integration, with the ambitious goal of a
single European market in 1992. The United States has often declared
it seeks a healing of old enmities, an integration of Europe. And at
of some Americans towards a more united Europe. To this ambivalence
the same time, there has been an historical ambivalence on the part
has been added apprehension at the prospect of 1992. But whatever
others may think, this administration is of one mind. We believe a
strong, united Europe means a strong America. (Applause.)
Western Europe has a gross domestic product that is
roughly equal to our own and a population that exceeds ours.
European science leads the world in many fields, and European workers
with the European Community and its member states, new mechanisms of
are highly educated and highly skilled. We are ready to develop,
consultation and cooperation on political and global issues from
strengthening the forces of democracy in the Third World to managing
regional tensions, to putting an end to the division of Europe. A
resurgent Western Europe is an economic magnet, drawing Eastern
Europe closer toward the commonwealth of free nations. A more
There are certain to be clashes and controversies over economic
mature partnership with Western Europe will pose new challenges.
issues. America will, of course, defend its interests. But it is
important to distinguish adversaries from allies and allies from
adversaries. What a tragedy; what an absurdity it would be if future
historians attribute the demise of the Western Alliance to disputes
over beef hormones and wars over pasta. We must all work hard to
ensure that the Europe of 1992 will adopt the lower barriers of the
medieval commerce.
modern international economy, not the high walls and the moats of
the peace in Europe. Forty-two years ago, just across the Charles
But our hopes for the future rest ultimately on keeping
River, Secretary of State George Marshall gave a commencement address
that outlined a plan to help Europe recover. Western Europe
the common defense -- a shield we call NATO. And this Alliance has
responded heroically, and later joined with us in a partnership for
always been driven by a spirited debate over the best way to achieve
peaceful change. But the deeper truth is that the Alliance has
achieved an historic peace because it is united by a fundamental
purpose. Behind the NATO shield, Europe has now enjoyed 40 free
years of conflict, -- 40 years free of conflict -- the longest period
MORE
- 3 -
of peace the continent has ever known. (Applause.) Behind this
shield, the nations of Western Europe have risen from privation to
prosperity -- all because of the strengh and resolve of free peoples.
With a Western Europe that is now coming together, we
recognize that new forms of cooperation must be developed. We
applaud the defense cooperation developing in the revitalized Western
European Union, whose members worked with us to keep open the
sea-lanes of the Persian Gulf. And we applaud the growing military
cooperation between West Germany and France. And we welcome British
and French programs to modernize their deterrent capability and their
moves toward cooperation in this area. It is perfectly right and
proper that Europeans increasingly see their defense cooperation as
an investment in a secure future. But we do have a major concern of
a different order -- a growing complacency throughout the West.
And, of course, your generation can hardly be expected to
share the grip of past anxieties. With such a long peace, it is hard
to imagine how it could be otherwise. But our expectations in this
rapidly changing world cannot race so far ahead that we forget what
is at stake. There's a great irony here. While an ideological
earthquake is shaking asunder the very communist foundation, the West
is being tested by complacency.
We must never forget that twice in this century, American
blood has been shed over conflicts that began in Europe. And we
share the fervent desire of Europeans to relegate war forever to the
province of distant memory. (Applause.) But that is why the
Atlantic Alliance is so central to our foreign policy. And that's
why America remains committed to the Alliance and the strategy which
has preserved freedom in Europe. We must never forget that to keep
the peace in Europe is to keep the peace for America.
NATO's policy of flexible response keeps the United
States linked to Europe and lets any would-be aggressors know that
they will be met with any level of force needed to repel their attack
and frustrate their designs. And our short-range deterrent forces
based in Europe, and kept up-to-date, demonstrate that America's
vital interests are bound inextricably to Western Europe, and that an
attacker can never gamble on a test of strength with just our
conventional forces. Though hope is now running high for a more
peaceful continent, the history of this century teaches Americans and
Europeans to remain prepared.
As we search for a peace that is enduring, I'm grateful
for the steps that Mr. Gorbachev is taking. If the Soviets advance
solid and constructive plans for peace, then we should give credit
where credit is due. And we're seeing sweeping changes in the Soviet
Union that show promise of enduring, of becoming ingrained. At the
same time, in an era of extraordinary change, we have an obligation
to temper optimism -- and I am optimistic -- with prudence.
For example, the Soviet Foreign Minister informed the
world last week that his nation's commitment to destroy SS-23
missiles under the recently enacted INF Treaty may be reversible.
And the Soviets must surely know the results of failure to comply
with this solemn agreement. Perhaps their purpose was to divide the
West on other issues that you're reading about in the papers today.
But regardless, it is clear that Soviet "new thinking" has not yet
totally overcome the old.
I believe in a deliberate, step-by-step approach to
East-West relations because recurring signs show that while change in
the Soviet Union is dramatic, it's not yet complete. The Warsaw Pact
retains a nearly 12-to-one advantage over the Atlantic Alliance in
short-range missile and rocket launchers capable of delivering
nuclear weapons; and more than a two-to-one advantage in battle
tanks. And for that reason, we will also maintain, in cooperation
with our allies, ground and air forces in Europe as long as they are
wanted and needed to preserve the peace in Europe. At the same time,
MORE
my administration will place a high and continuing priority on
negotiating a less militarized Europe, one with a secure conventional
force balance at lower levels of forces. Our aspiration is a real
peace -- a peace of shared optimism, not a peace of armed camps.
(Applause.)
Nineteen-ninety-two is the 500th anniversary of the
discovery of the New World. So we have five centuries to celebrate,
nothing less than our very civilization -- the American Bill of
Rights and the French Rights of Man, the ancient and unwritten
Constitution of Great Britain, and the democratic visions of Konrad
Adenauer and Alcide de Gasperi.
And in all our celebrations, we observe one fact: this
truly is a moral and spiritual community. It is our inheritance and
so let us protect it. Let us promote it. Let us treasure it for our
children, for Americans and Europeans yet unborn. We stand with
France as part of a solid Alliance. And once again, let me say how
proud I am to have received this degree from this noble institution
and to have shared this platform with the President of the French
Republic Francois Mitterrand.
Thank you very, very much. Viva la France and long live
the United States of America. Thank you very much. (Applause.)
END
12:50 P.M. EDT
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
(New London, Connecticut)
For Immediate Release
May 24, 1989
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
AT THE COAST GUARD ACADEMY
GRADUATION CEREMONY
Nitchman Field
Coast Guard Academy
New London, Connecticut
12:13 P.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you all very much. And, Mr.
Superintendent, my friend, Rick, thank you for inviting me here.
Thank all of the -- particularly those in the white uniforms who are
fixing to move on for that warm welcome. To Admiral Yost, the
Commandant and Secretary Skinner, Dr. Alex Haley, and all the
distinguished, broke but happy parents sitting over here --
(laughter) -- this is a special day. I want to single out Admiral
Cueroni for -- who will be leaving the service, that he has served so
well. And it was my pleasure as Vice President of the United States
to work directly with him when he headed the south Florida effort
fighting narcotics. And he showed us a lot of class then and he
the Coast Guard. (Applause.)
showed the country a lot of class for his many years in service to
I want to congratulate each member of this year's class
on receiving your commission into such a proud service. You mention
the Coast Guard and most people think about lives saved at sea,
daring rescue operations. But those daily acts of heroism are just
one part of the vital work that this Coast Guard performs. Right
now, in Prince William Sound, the Coast Guard continues to work
around the clock in a major environmental clean-up. And let me at
this point, on behalf of a grateful nation, commend Admiral Yost.
Through his personal commitment, his involvement, and the leadership
of the United States Coast Guard.
that he has shown, he has served his country in the finest tradition
And those of us who care about the environment -- and
that is 250 million Americans at a minimum -- he's showing us the
proud of what Paul Yost has done. (Applause.)
way. And your service -- backing him up in every way, and I am very
chasing down drug smugglers -- helping to keep the drugs off the
Right now, off the Florida coast, Coast Guard patrols are
streets. And that may be all in a day's work for the Coast Guard --
our security.
but it is absolutely vital to our national health, our well-being and
I'm sure on that long first day of Swab Summer that you
never thought four years could pass so quickly. But they have. And
you've worked hard -- Billet Night has come and gone -- (laughter) --
and you're ready -- Semper Paratus in the words of your motto --
ready to enter the Coast Guard service, enter the world. And the
truth is, that's what commencement is all about. The world is yours,
and today's ceremony is really part of the change of command from one
generation to the next.
Today our world -- your world -- is changing, East and
West. And today I want to speak to you about the world we want to
see, and what we can do to bring that new world into clear focus.
MORE
- 2 -
We live in a time when we are witnessing the end of an
idea -- the final chapter of the communist experiment. Communism is
now recognized -- even by many within the communist world itself --
as a failed system -- one that promised economic prosperity but
failed to deliver the goods, a system that built a wall between the
people and their political aspirations.
But the eclipse of communism is only one half of the
story of our time. The other is the ascendancy of the democratic
idea. Never before has the idea of freedom so captured the
imaginations of men and women the world over. And never before has
the hope of freedom beckoned so many. Trade unionists in Warsaw.
The people of Panama. Rulers consulting the ruled in the Soviet
Union. And even as we speak today, the world is transfixed by the
dramatic events in Tiananmen Square. Everywhere those voices are
speaking the language of democracy and freedom, and we hear them and
them. the world hears them, and America will do all it can to encourage
So today I want to speak about our security strategy for
aims. the 1990's -- one that advances American ideals and upholds American
Amidst the many challenges we'll face, there will be
risks. But let me assure you -- we'll find more than our share of
opportunities. We and our allies are strong -- stronger really than
at any point in the post-war period, and more capable than ever of
supporting the cause of freedom
There's an opportunity before us to shape a new world.
What is it that we want to see? It is a growing
community of democracies anchoring international peace and stability,
and a dynamic free market system generating prosperity and progress
on a global scale. The economic foundation of this new era is the
proven success of the free market -- and nurturing that foundation
are the values rooted in freedom and democracy.
Our country, America, was founded on these values and
they gave us the confidence that flows from strength. So let's be
clear about one thing: America looks forward to the challenge of an
emerging global market. But these values are not ours alone; they
are now shared by our friends and allies around the globe.
The economic rise of Europe and the nations of the
Pacific Rim is the growing success of our post-war policy. This time
is a time of tremendous opportunity -- and destiny is in our own
hands. To reach the world we want to see, we've got to work, and
work hard. There's a lot of work ahead of us.
We must resolve international trade problems that
threaten to pit friends and allies against one another. We must
combat misguided notions of economic nationalism that will tell us to
marketplace has become a fact of life.
close off our economies to foreign competition, just when the global
We must open the door to the nations of Eastern Europe
and other socialist countries that embrace free market reforms.
And finally, for developing nations heavily burdened with
debt, we must provide assistance and encourage the market reforms
that will set those nations on a path towards growth.
If we succeed, the next decade and the century beyond
will be an era of unparalleled growth -- an era which sees the
flourishing of freedom, peace and prosperity around the world.
But this new era cannot unfold in a climate where
conflict and turmoil exist. And therefore, our goals must also
include security and stability: security for ourselves and our
MORE
- 3 -
allies and our friends; stability in the international arena, and an
end to regional conflicts.
Such goals are constant, but the strategy we employ to
reach them can, and must, change as the world changes. Today, the
need for a dynamic and adaptable strategy is imperative. We must be
strong -- economically, diplomatically, and, as you know, militarily
-- to take advantage of the opportunities open to us in a world of
rapid change. And nowhere will the ultimate consequences of change
have more significance for world security than within the Soviet
Union itself.
What we're seeing now in the Soviet Union is indeed
dramatic. The process is still ongoing, unfinished. But make no
mistake -- our policy is to seize every, and I mean every,
opportunity to build a better, more stable relationship with the
Soviet Union -- just as it is our policy to defend American interests
in light of the enduring reality of Soviet military power.
We want to see perestroika succeed. And we want to see
the policies of glasnost and perestroika -- so far, a revolution
imposed from top down -- institutionalized within the Soviet Union.
And we want to see, perestroika extended as well. We want to see a
Soviet Union that restructures its relationship toward the rest of
the world -- a Soviet Union that is a force for constructive
solutions to the world's problems.
The grand strategy of the West during the post-war period
has been based on the concept of containment: checking the Soviet
Union's expansionist aims, in the hope that the Soviet system itself
would one day be forced to confront its internal contradictions. The
ferment in the Soviet Union today affirms the wisdom of this
strategy. And now we have a precious opportunity to move beyond
containment. You're graduating into an exciting world, where the
better. opportunity for peace -- world peace, lasting peace -- has never been
Our goal -- integrating the Soviet Union into the
community of nations -- is every bit as ambitious as containment was
at stability. its time. And it holds tremendous promise for international
Coping with a changing Soviet Union will be a challenge
of the highest order. But the security challenges we face today do
not come from the East alone. The emergence of regional powers is
rapidly changing the strategic landscape.
In the Middle East, in South Asia, in our own hemisphere,
a growing number of nations are acquiring advanced and highly
destructive capabilities -- in some cases, weapons of mass
destruction, and the means to deliver them. And it is an unfortunate
fact that the world faces increasing threat from armed insurgencies,
terrorists, and as you in the Coast Guard are well aware, narcotics
traffickers -- and, in some regions, an unholy alliance of all three.
Our task is clear: we must curb the proliferation of
advanced weaponry; we must check the aggressive ambitions of renegade
regimes; and we must enhance the ability of our friends to defend
themselves. We have not yet mastered the complex challenge. We and
developing world.
our allies must construct a common strategy for stability in the
How we and our allies deal with these diverse challenges
depends on how well we understand the key elements of defense
strategy. And so let me just mention today two points in particular.
First, the need for an effective deterrent, one that
American resolve;
demonstrates to our allies and adversaries alike American strength,
MORE
- 4 -
And second, the need to maintain an approach to arms
armaments. reduction that promotes stability at the lowest feasible level of
to keeping the peace is convincing our adversaries that the cost of
Deterrence is central to our defense strategy. The key
aggression against us or our allies is simply unacceptable.
In today's world, nuclear forces are esssential to
deterrence. Our challenge is to protect those deterrent systems from
attack. And that's why we'll move Peacekeeper ICBMs out of fixed and
Looking to the longer-term, we will also develop and deploy a new
vulnerable silos -- making them mobile and thus harder to target.
highly mobile single-warhead missile, the Midgetman. With only
minutes of warnings, these new missiles can relocate out of harm's
way. Any attack against systems like this will fail.
when ready -- a more comprehensive defensive system, known as SDI.
We are also researching -- and we are committed to deploy
Our premise is straightforward: defense against incoming missiles
endangers no person, endangers no country.
We're also working to reduce the threat we face -- both
nuclear and conventional. The INF Treaty demonstrates that
willingness. In addition, in the past decade, NATO has unilaterally
removed 2400 shorter-range theater warheads. But theater nuclear
forces contribute to stability, no less than strategic forces, and
forces to deter conflict in Europe.
thus it would be irresponsible to depend solely on strategic nuclear
and is linked to the nuclear balance. For more than 40 years -- and
The conventional balance in Europe is just as important,
look at your history books to see how pronounced this accomplishment
conventional forces has cast a shadow over Europe.
is -- for more than 40 years, the Warsaw Pact's massive advantage in
The unilateral reductions that President Gorbachev has
promised give us hope that we can now redress that imbalance. We
welcome those steps because, if implemented, they will help reduce
the threat of surprise attack. And they confirm what we've said all
along -- that Soviet military power far exceeds the levels needed to
defend the legitimate security interests of the USSR. And we must
keep in mind that these reductions alone -- even if implememted --
are not enough to eliminate the significant numerical superiority
that the Soviet Union enjoys right now.
landscape of Europe. The issues are complex, stakes are very high.
Through negotiation, we can now transform the military
But the Soviets are now being forthcoming, and we hope to achieve the
reductions that we seek.
war as an option in Europe.
Let me emphasize -- our aim is nothing less than removing
The USSR has said that it is willing to abandon its
age-old reliance on offensive strategy. It's time to begin. This
should mean a smaller force -- one less reliant on tanks and
artillery and personnel carriers that provide the Soviets' offensive
striking power. A restructured Warsaw Pact -- one that mirrors the
defensive secure. posture of NATO -- would make Europe and the world more
Peace can also be enhanced by movement towards more
openness in military activities. And two weeks ago, I proposed an
"open skies" initiative, to extend the concept of openness. That
plan for territorial overflights would increase our mutual security
against sudden and threatening military activities. In the same
spirit, let us extend this openness to military expenditures as well.
I call on the Soviets to do as we have always done. Let's open the
ledgers. Publish an accurate defense budget.
MORE
- 5 -
But as we move forward we must be realistic.
Transformations of this magnitude will not happen overnight. If we
are to reach our goals, a great deal is required of us, our allies --
and of the Soviet Union. But we can succeed.
I began today by speaking about the triumph of a
particular, peculiar, very special American ideal -- freedom. And I
know there are those who may think there's something presumptuous
about that claim -- those who will think it's boastful. But it is
our inheritance.
not, for one simple reason: Democracy isn't our creation -- it is
And we can't take credit for democracy -- but we can take
that precious gift of freedom, preserve it and pass it on -- as my
generation -- does to you, and you, too, will do one day. And perhaps
others attain the freedom that we cherish.
provided we seize the opportunities open to us -- we can help
As I said on the Capitol steps the day I took this
office, as President of the United States, "There is but one just use
of power, and it is to serve people." As your Commander in Chief,
let me call on this Coast Guard class to reaffirm with me that
American power will continue in its service to the enduring ideals of
democracy and freedom.
Congratulations to each and every one of you. Thank you
and (Applause.) God bless the United States of America. Thank you all very much.
END
12:32 P.M. EDT
THE WHITE HOUSE
office of the Press Secretary
(Frankfurt, Federal Republic of Germany)
For Immediate Release
May 31, 1989
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
AT RHEINGOLDHALLE
Rheingoldhalle
Mainz, Federal Republic of Germany
1:16 P.M. (L)
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you, Chancellor Kohl. At the
outset, let me tell you that lest you think that he has forgotten his
home state because he is the Chancellor of the Federal Republic, I
will only tell you that in the last 24 hours, Chancellor Kohl has
been convincing me that when I came to this state and to Mainz, I
would be coming to heaven. And having gotten here, I think he may
much. (Applause.)
just about be right, I'll tell you. (Laughter.) Thank you all very
Dr. Wagner and Lord Mayor, distinguished hosts -- I want
to also thank these two bands -- West German and American -- for that
stirring music. And Chancellor Kohl, I especially want to thank you
again for inviting me to this beautiful and ancient city on my first
presidential trip to the Republic of Germany -- the Federal Republic.
And Herr Kohl and I have concluded now our deliberations at the NATO
as Chancellor and President.
summit in Brussels -- an excellent start to our working partnership
And here in Mainz, by the banks of the Rhine, it's often
said that this heartland of mountain vineyards and villages embodies
the very soul of Germany. So Mainz provides a fitting forum for an
American President to address the German people. (Applause.)
Today I come to speak, not just of our mutual defense,
but of our shared values. I come to speak, not just of the matters
of the mind, but of the deeper aspirations of the heart.
Just this morning, Baybara and I were charmed with the
experiences we had. I met with a group -- a small group of German
students, bright young men and women who studied in the United
States. Their knowledge of our country and the world was impressive
to say the least. But sadly, too many in the West, Americans and
Europeans alike, seem to have forgotten the lessons of our common
heritage and how the world we know came to be. And that should not
be, and that cannot be. We must recall that the generation coming
into its own in America and Western Europe is heir to gifts greater
than those bestowed to any generation in history -- peace, freedom
and prosperity. (Applause.)
This inheritance is possible because 40 years ago the
nations of the West joined in that noble, common cause called NATO.
And first, there was the vision, the concept of free peoples in North
America and Europe working to protect their values. And second,
there was the practical sharing of risks and burdens, and a realistic
recognition of Soviet expansionism. And finally, there was the
determination to look beyond old animosities. The NATO Alliance did
nothing less than provide a way for Western Europe to heal
centuries-old rivalries, to begin an era of reconciliation and
restoration. (Applause.) It has been, in fact, a second Renaissance of Europe.
As you know best, this is not just the 40th birthday of
the Alliance. It's also the 40th birthday of the Federal Republic --
MORE
- 2 -
a Republic born in hope, tempered by challenge. And at the height of
the Berlin Crisis in 1948, Ernst Reuter called on Germans to stand
firm and confident, and you did courageously, magnificently.
And the historic genius of the German people has
flourished in this age of peace. And your nation has become a leader
in technology, and the fourth largest economy on Earth. But more
important, you have inspired the world by forcefully promoting the
principles of human rights, democracy and freedom. The United States
and the Federal Republic have always been firm friends and allies.
But today we share an added role -- partners in leadership.
of course, leadership has a constant companion --
responsibility. And our responsibility is to look ahead and grasp
the promise of the future.
I said recently that we're at the end of one era, and at
the beginning of another. And I noted that in regard to the Soviet
Union, our policy is to move beyond containment.
For 40 years, the seeds of democracy in Eastern Europe
lay dormant, buried under the frozen tundra of the Cold War. And for
40 years, the world has waited for the Cold War to end. And decade
after decade, time after time, the flowering human spirit withered
from the chill of conflict and oppression. And again, the world
waited. But the passion for freedom cannot be denied forever. The
world has waited long enough. The time is right. Let Europe be
whole and free. (Applause.)
To the founders of the Alliance, this aspiration was a
distant dream, and now it's the new mission of NATO. If ancient
rivals like Britain and France, or France and Germany, can reconcile,
then why not the nations of the East and West?
In the East, brave men and women are showing us the way.
Look at Poland, where Solidarity -- Solidarnosc and the Catholic
Church have won legal status. The forces of freedom are putting the
Soviet status quo on the defensive.
In the West, we have succeeded because we've been
faithful to our values and our vision. And the other side of the
rusting Iron Curtain, their vision failed.
The Cold War began with the division of Europe. It can
only end when Europe is whole. (Applause.) Today, it is this very
concept of a divided Europe that is under siege. And that's why our
hopes run especially high, because the division of Europe is under
siege not by armies, but by the spread of ideas that began here,
right here. It was a son of Mainz, Johannes Gutenberg, who liberated
the mind of man through the power of the printed word.
And that same liberating power is unleashed today in a
hundred new forms. The Voice of America, Deutsche Welle allow us to
enlighten millions deep within Eastern Europe and throughout the
world. Television satellites allow us to bear witness from the
shipyards of Gdansk to Tiananmen Square. But the momentum for
freedom does not just come from the printed word or the transistor or
the television screen. It comes from a single powerful idea --
democracy. (Applause.)
This one idea -- this one idea is sweeping across
Eurasia. This one idea is why the communist world, from Budapest to
Beijing, is in ferment. of course, for the leaders of the East, it's
not just freedom for freedom's sake. But whatever their motivation,
they are unleashing a force they will find difficult to channel or
control -- the hunger for liberty of oppressed peoples who have
tasted freedom.
Nowhere is this more apparent than in Eastern Europe, the
birthplace of the Cold War. In Poland, at the end of World War II,
MORE
- 3 -
the Soviet Army prevented the free elections promised by Stalin at
Yalta. And today, Poles are taking the first steps toward real
elections, so long promised -- so long deferred. And in Hungary, at
last we see a chance for multi-party competition at the ballot box.
As President, I will continue to do all I can to help
open the closed societies of the East. We seek self-determination
for all of Germany and all of Eastern Europe. (Applause.) And we
will not relax and we must not waver. Again, the world has waited
long enough.
But democracy's journey East is not easy. Intellectuals
like the great Czech playwright Vaclav Havel still work under the
shadow of coercion. And repression still menaces too many peoples of
Eastern Europe. Barriers and barbed wire still fence in nations. So
when I visit Poland and Hungary this summer, I will deliver this
message: There cannot be a common European home until all within it
are free to move from room to room. (Applause.)
And I'll take another message: The path of freedom leads
to a larger home -- a home where West meets East, a democratic home
-- the commonwealth of free nations.
And I said that positive steps by the Soviets would be
met by steps of our own. And this is why I announced on May 12th a
readiness to consider granting to the Soviets a temporary waiver of
the Jackson-Vanik trade restrictions, if they liberalize emigration.
And this is also why I announced on Monday that the United States is
prepared to drop the "no exceptions" standard that has guided our
approach to controlling the export of technology to the Soviet Union
-- lifting a sanction enacted in response to their invasion of
Afghanistan. (Applause.)
And in this same spirit, I set forth four proposals to
heal Europe's tragic division, to help Europe become whole and free.
First, I propose we strengthen and broaden the Helsinki
process to promote free elections and political pluralism in Eastern
Europe. As the forces of freedom and democracy rise in the East, so
should our expectations.
And weaving together the slender threads of freedom in
the East will require much from the Western democracies. In
particular, the great political parties of the West must assume an
historic responsibility -- to lend counsel and support to those brave
men and women who are trying to form the first truly representative
political parties in the East, to advance freedom and democracy, to
part the Iron Curtain. (Applause.)
In fact, it's already begun to part. The frontier of
barbed wire and minefields between Hungary and Austria is being
removed, foot by foot, mile by mile. Just as the barriers are coming
down in Hungary, so must they fall throughout all of Eastern Europe.
Let Berlin be next. (Applause.) Let Berlin be next. (Applause.)
Nowhere is the division between East and West seen more
clearly than in Berlin. And there this brutal wall cuts neighbor
from neighbor, brother from brother. And that Wall stands as a
monument to the failure of communism. It must come down.
(Applause.)
Now, glasnost may be a Russian word, but openness is a
Western concept. West Berlin has always enjoyed the openness of a
free city. And our proposal would make all Berlin a center of
commerce between East and West -- a place of cooperation, not a point
of confrontation. And we rededicate ourselves to the 1987 allied
initiative to strengthen freedom and security in that divided city.
This, then is my second proposal -- bring glasnost to East Berlin.
(Applause.)
MORE
- 4 -
My generation remembers a Europe ravaged by war. And of
course, Europe has long since rebuilt its proud cities and restored
ts.majestic cathedrals. But what a tragedy it would be if your
continent was again spoiled, this time by a more subtle and insidious
danger -- the Chancellor referred to it -- that of poisoned rivers
and acid rain.
America has faced an environmental tragedy in Alaska.
Countries from France to Finland suffered after Chernobyl. West
Germany is struggling to save the Black Forest today. And
throughout, we have all learned a terrible lesson -- environmental
destruction respects no borders. (Applause.)
So my third proposal is to work together on these
environmental problems, with the United States and Western Europe
extending a hand to the East. Since much remains to be done in both
East and West, we ask Eastern Europe to join us in this common
struggle. We can offer technical training, assistance in drafting
laws and regulations, and new technologies for tackling these awesome
problems. And I invite the environmentalists and engineers of the
East to visit the West, to share knowledge so we can succeed in this
great cause.
My fourth proposal -- actually, a set of proposals --
concerns a less militarized Europe, the most heavily armed continent
in the world. Nowhere is this more important than in the two
Germanys. And that's why our quest to safely reduce armaments has a
special significance for the German people.
To those who are impatient with our measured pace in arms
reductions, I respectfully suggest that history teaches us a lesson
-- that unity and strength are the catalyst and prerequisite to arms
control. We've always believed that a strong Western defense is the
best road to peace. (Applause.) Forty years of experience have proven
us right.
But we've done more than just keep the peace. By
standing together, we have convinced the Soviets that their arms
buildup has been costly and pointless. Let us not give them
incentives to return to the policies of the past. Let us give them
every (Applause.) reason to abandon the arms race for the sake of the human race.
In this era of both negotiation and armed camps, America
understands that West Germany bears a special burden. of course, in
this nuclear age, every nation is on the front line. But not all
free nations are called to endure the tension of regular military
activity, or the constant presence of foreign military forces. We
are imposes. sensitive to these special conditions that this needed presence
To significantly ease the burden of armed camps in
Europe, we must be aggressive in our pursuit of solid, verifiable
agreements between NATO and the Warsaw Pact.
On Monday, with my NATO colleagues in Brussels, I shared
my great hope for the future of conventional arms negotiations in
Europe. I shared with them a proposal for achieving significant
reductions in the near future.
And as you know, the Warsaw Pact has now accepted major
elements of our Western approach to the new conventional arms
negotiations in Vienna. The Eastern Bloc acknowledges that a
substantial imbalance exists between the conventional forces of the
two Alliances. And they've moved closer to NATO's position by
accepting most elements of our initial conventional arms proposal.
These encouraging steps have produced the opportunity for creative
and (Applause.) decisive action, and we shall not let that opportunity pass.
MORE
- 5 -
Our proposal has several key initiatives.
I propose that we "lock in" the Eastern agreement to
Western-proposed ceilings on tanks and armored troop carriers. We
should also seek an agreement on common numerical ceiling for
artillery in the range between NATO's and that of the Warsaw Pact,
provided these definitional problems can be solved. And the weapons
we remove must be destroyed.
We should expand our current offer to include all
land-based combat aircraft and helicopters, by proposing that both
sides reduce in these categories to a level 15 percent below the
current NATO totals. Given the Warsaw Pact's advantage in numbers,
the Pact would have to make far-deeper reductions than NATO to
establish parity at those lower levels. Again, the weapons we remove
must be destroyed.
I propose a 20 percent cut in combat manpower in
U.S. -stationed forces, and a resulting ceiling on U.S. and Soviet
ground and air forces stationed outside of national territory in the
Atlantic-to-the-Urals zone, at approximately 275,000 each. This
reduction to parity, a fair and balanced level of strength, would
compel the Soviets to reduce their 000-strong Red Army in Eastern
Europe (Applause.) by 325,000. And these withdrawn forces must be demobilized.
And finally, I call on President Gorbachev to accelerate
the timetable for reaching these agreements. There is no reason why
the five-to-six year timetable as suggested by Moscow is necessary.
I propose a much more ambitious schedule. And we should aim to reach
an agreement within six months to a year, and accomplish reductions
by 1992, or 1993 at the latest. (Applause.)
In addition to my conventional arms proposals, I believe
that we ought to strive to improve the openness with which we and the
Soviets conduct our military activities. And therefore, I want to
reiterate my support for greater transparency. I renew my proposal
that the Soviet Union and its allies open their skies to reciprocal,
unarmed aerial surveillance flights, conducted on short notice, to
watch military activities. Satellites are a very important way to
verify arms control agreements. But they do not provide constant
coverage of the Soviet Union. An Open Skies policy would move both
greater openness between East and West.
sides closer to a total continuity of coverage, while symbolizing
These are my proposals to achieve a less militarized
Europe. A short time ago they would have been too revolutionary to
consider. And yet today, we may well be on the verge of a more
ambitious agreement in Europe than anyone considered possible.
But we are also challenged by developments outside of
NATO's traditional areas of concern. Every Western nation still
faces the global proliferation of lethal technologies, including
ballistic missiles and chemical weapons. We must collectively
control the spread of these growing threats. So we should begin as
soon (Applause.) as possible with a worldwide ban on chemical weapons.
Growing political freedom in the East, a Berlin without
barriers, a cleaner environment, a less militarized Europe -- each is
a noble goal, and taken together they are the foundation of our
larger vision -- a Europe that is free and at peace with itself. And
so let the Soviets know that our goal is not to undermine their
legitimate security interests. Our goal is to convince them, step by
step, that their definition of security is obsolete, that their
deepest fears are unfounded. (Applause.)
When Western Europe takes its giant step in 1992, it will
institutionalize what's been true for years -- borders open to
people, commerce and ideas. No shadow of suspicion, no sinister fear
MORE
- 6 -
is cast between you. The very prospect of war within the West is
unthinkable to our citizens. (Applause.) But such a peaceful
integration of nations into a world community does not mean that any
nation must relinquish its culture, much less its sovereignty.
This process of integration, a subtle weaving of shared
interests, which is so nearly complete in Western Europe, has now
finally begun in the East. We want to help the nations of Eastern
Europe realize what we, the nations of Western Europe, learned long
ago. The foundation of lasting security comes, not from tanks,
troops or barbed wire. It is built on shared values and agreements
that link free peoples. (Applause.)
The nations of Eastern Europe are rediscovering the
glories of their national heritage. So let the colors and hues of
national culture return to these grey societies of the East. Let
Europe forego a peace of tension for a peace of trust, one in which
the peoples of the East and West can rejoice; a continent that is
diverse, yet whole.
Forty years of Cold War have tested Western resolve and
the strength of our values. NATO's first mission is now nearly
complete. But if we are to fulfill our vision -- our European vision
-- the challenges of the next 40 years will ask no less of us.
Together, enough. we shall answer the call. The world has waited long
Thank you for inviting me to Mainz. May God bless you
all. Long live the friendship between Germany and the United States.
Thank you and God bless you. (Applause.)
END
1:45 P.M. (L)
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
May 11, 1989
STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT
The Briefing Room
4:07 P.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I have a statement here, and then
I'll be glad to take a couple of questions. And then I will turn the
meeting over to General Scowcroft for any follow-up.
The people of Latin America and the Caribbean have
sacrificed, fought, and died to establish democracy. Today, elected
the people in the Americas. And the days of the dictator are over.
constitutional government is the clear choice of the vast majority of
Still, in many parts of our hemisphere, the enemies of democracy lie
elections through fraud.
in wait to overturn elected governments through force or to steal
All nations in the democratic community have a
responsibility to make it clear through our actions and our words
that efforts to overturn constitutional regimes or steal elections
are unacceptable. If we fail to send a clear signal when democracy
is imperiled, the enemies of constitutional government will become
more dangerous. And that's why events in Panama place an enormous
responsibility on all nations in the democratic community.
voted to elect a new democratic leadership of their country, and they
This past week, the people of Panama, in record numbers,
voted to replace the dictatorship of General Manuel Noriega. The
whole world was watching. Every credible observer, the Catholic
Church, Latin and European observers, leaders of our Congress, and
two former Presidents of the United States tell the same story: the
won by a margin of nearly three to one.
opposition won. It was not even a close election. The opposition
The Noriega regime first tried to steal this election
through massive fraud and intimidation and now has nullified the
election and resorted to violence and bloodshed. In recent days, a
host of Latin American leaders have condemned this election fraud.
They've Panama. called on General Noriega to heed the will of the people of
We support and second those demands. The United States
will not recognize, nor accommodate with a regime that holds power
right to be free.
through force and violence at the expense of the Panamanian people's
with democratic leaders in Latin America and in Europe. These
I've exchanged these views over the last several days
consultations will continue.
The crisis in Panama is a conflict between Noriega and
the people of Panama. The United States stands with the Panamanian
people. We share their hope that the Panamanian Defense Forces will
stand with them and fulfill their constitutional obligation to defend
democracy. A professional Panamanian Defense Force can have an
important role to play in Panama's democratic future.
The United States is committed to democracy in Panama.
We respect the sovereignty of Panama and, of course, we have great
affection for the Panamanian people. We are also committed to
protect the lives of our citizens. And we're committed to the
MORE
2 -
for all nations through the Canal.
integrity of the Panama Canal treaties which guarantee safe passage
The Panama Canal treaties are a proud symbol of respect
and partnership between the people of the United States and the
people of Panama. In support of these objectives and after
consulting this morning with the bipartisan leadership of the
Congress, I am taking the following steps:
First, the United States strongly supports and will
cooperate with initiatives taken by governments in this hemisphere to
address this crisis through regional diplomacy and action in the
Organization of American States and through other means.
Second, our Ambassador in Panama, Arthur Davis, has been
only. recalled and our Embassy staff will be reduced to essential personnel
Third, U.S. government employees and their dependents
living outside of U.S. military bases or Panama Canal commissioned
housing areas will be relocated out of Panama or to secure U.S.
housing areas within Panama. This action will begin immediately. It
will be completed as quickly and in an orderly a manner as possible.
Fourth, the State Department, through its travel
advisory, will encourage U.S. business representatives resident in
wherever possible.
Panama to arrange for the extended absences of their dependents
Fifth, economic sanctions will continue in force.
Sixth, the United States will carry out its obligations
and will assert and enforce its treaty rights in Panama under the
Panama Canal treaties.
And finally, we are sending a brigade-size force to
Panama to augment our military forces already assigned there. If
required, I do not rule out further steps in the future.
The United States and all democratic nations in this
hemisphere hope that a peaceful resolution can be found to the crisis
institution, to put the well-being of their country first and seek an
in Panama. And we urge all those in Panama, every individual, every
honorable solution to this crisis. The way is still open.
Thank you. God bless.
Q
charges against Noriega if it will mean that he will leave the
Mr. President, are you willing to drop the drug
country or at least give up control in a quid pro quo?
THE PRESIDENT: No.
Q
Mr. President, do you recognize Mr. Endara as the
him inaugurated?
President-elect, and what steps should the United States help to get
determination at this point.
THE PRESIDENT: We have not made any formal recognition
Q
Mr. President, I understand that you've been trying
THE PRESIDENT: We have been talking to other countries
in the hemisphere on that point I might add, Terry, but we have made
no further -- no official determination.
Q
I understand you've been trying today, sir, to get
other leaders in the hemisphere to agree on a joint statement of
condemnation of Noriega, and I wonder if you could give us a progress
report on that diplomatic effort, sir?
MORE
- 3 -
THE PRESIDENT: Well, one, I have not -- by joint
would participate. Some of the leaders in this hemisphere are
statement -- encouraged a joint statement in which the United States
working on getting a joint statement and, indeed, I'm told
authoritatively that there might be a joint statement out of some
European countries. But we would encourage countries in this
hemisphere to either jointly or personally make strong statements.
And I believe that -- I want to say 10 countries have already made
action is going to be at the OAS.
individual statements and now I think the next collective diplomatic
Q
quartered in the military compound? Will they stay there quietly and
Sir, how many troops will that mean and will they be
just be there or will they be out on the streets patrolling?
our treaty rights, and I will refer to -- let General Skowcroft
THE PRESIDENT: We will assert our treaty rights, enforce
2,000. answer the question, but my estimate of the troops would be about
or
sending the brigade of troops? What are you worried about?
Mr. President, what is your justification for
citizens. And I will do what is necessary to protect the lives of
THE PRESIDENT: I'm worried about the lives of American
American citizens. And we will not be intimidated by the bullying
tactics, brutal though they may be, of the dictator, Noriega.
or
forces, would that be a signal that the United States would look
Mr. President, your statement just now about defense
favorably on a coup attempt?
of Americans in Panama.
this point. It is democracy in Panama; it is protection of the at life
THE PRESIDENT: I have asserted what my interest is
I'm going to take two more and then I'm going to go.
American embassies. We find no enthusiasm for the dispatch of
Q sir, we've been calling around to these Latin
you're getting from Latin America?
warned against intervention. Are you disappointed at the reaction
American troops there and the Mexican embassy even said that they
have Americans. I haven't talked to them on that particular point, but we
THE PRESIDENT: We've had good reaction from the Latin
what -- the role of several of the Latin American leaders.
had very good reaction from them and I have been impressed with
election, or the threat to democracy in the hemisphere from
on their part of the threat to democracy from the stealing of this
I think for the first time there is a total understanding
totalitarianism, and it's brought home by this theft of the election.
So they don't -- I might add on the troops, I have a
profound obligation and that is -- as Commander-in-chief of the Armed
I'm Forces and as President -- and that is to protect American life, and
going to do what is prudent and necessary to do this. And
have a different obligation. We also have certain treaty rights so and we
prepared to see that our treaty rights are exercised. And that --
obligations. I'm prepared to fulfill our treaty obligations and I am
so, I'd leave it right there in terms of the troop deployments.
Last one.
O
Mr. President, in the Reagan administration there
was a very formal negotiating process with General Noriega over terms
repeat itself now, that there might be some sort of formal
under which he might leave. Is there any possibility that that might
discussions between yourselves and the Panamanian government and
General Noriega about conditions under which he might leave?
MORE
- 4 -
THE PRESIDENT: Oh, he knows my position on the fact that
if he does leave we would have the instant restoration of normal
relations with Panama. That has been conveyed to him very, very
recently. But, look, I will be open-minded about seeing what it
might take to see him leave. I'm not going to go back and do what
Helen asked about in dropping these indictments. I'm not going to do
that. That has profound implications for our fight against
narcotics, which has got to be worldwide. But if there's something
short of that, the door is open to understand what it is that would
be required. But I don't think he's -- the Panamanian people should
be asked to compromise in terms of their election, which was won
three to one by those opposed to Noriega. So there would be certain
things, other non-negotiable things -- but I don't think -- that's
between Noriega and the Panamanian people.
Thank you all very much. And Brent will take the
remaining questions.
Q
How is Endara? Is he in the hospital?
THE PRESIDENT: He was out and then I think he's back in.
But now, I don't know whether he's gotten out later on or not.
GENERAL SCOWCROFT: I think he's back.
!
Is Noriega capable of --
Q
Are you concerned about him taking hostages?
THE PRESIDENT: I'm concerned about protecting the lives
of Americans. And that is exactly why I've taken the action I have
here today.
END
4:20 P.M. EDT
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
(New York, New York)
EMBARGOED FOR RELEASE
UNTIL 11:45 A.M. EDT
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 1989
FACT SHEET
The President's Chemical Weapons Initiative
In his speech to the 44th United Nations General Assembly, the
President announced a new initiative to halt and reverse the
growing spread and use of chemical weapons, and to accelerate the
negotiations for a global ban on chemical weapons.
The United States has long taken the lead in the effort to
prevent the use and spread of chemical weapons:
In April 1984, then Vice President Bush proposed a
draft treaty that would ban development, acquisition;
production, stockpiling, transfer, and use of chemical
weapons. Since then, the N S draft treaty has served
as the basis for negotiations on CW among the 40-nation
Conference on Disarmament in Geneva.
While the Geneva negotiations have achieved agreement
on a number of knotty issues, many important questions
remain to be resolved
The President reaffirmed the U.S. commitment to a multilateral
treaty that would completely eliminate chemical weapons in ten
years, provided all CW capable states become party to the treaty.
In order to give new impetus to the negotiations for such a ban,
the President proposed the following initiatives:
The U.S. will destroy more than 98 percent of its
current chemical weapons stockpile within eight years
after entry into force of a multilateral chemical
weapons convention, provided the Soviet Union is also a
party to the convention.
The remaining two percent would then be destroyed in
the following two years after all chemical weapons
capable countries become parties to the convention.
While working to complete a global chemical weapons
convention, the U.S. will propose to the Soviet Union
that the two countries agree to the destruction of a
major portion of their respective CW stockpiles down to
equal levels. This destruction would he on
agreed terms, and must include far-reaching
verification provisions. We would propose that the
interim level be set at about 20 percent of the current
U.S. level. The U.S. objective is to reach agreement
quickly 60 that substantial destruction of existing
U.S. and Soviet stockpiles could be underway even
before the multilateral CW convention takes effect.
o
Finally, the U.S. will accelerate and significantly
expand its efforts to improve verification capabilities
and resolve the many technical and procedural questions
associated with verification of a CW ban.
- more -
- 2 -
The objective of this initiative is'to accelerate agreement on,
and implementation of, a global ban on the production, storage,
transfer and use of chemical weapons. This task has greater
urgency today because:
o
The use of chemical weapons in violation of
international law has increased in recent years;
The number of countries that have acquired or seek to
acquire chemical weapons capability now numbers about
20. Coupled with the acquisition of increasingly
sophisticated and far-ranging delivery systems, this
poses a serious and growing threat to regional
stability;
o
The 1925 Geneva Protocol only bans the first use of CW
in war, not the possession of these weapons.
The evidence of eroding respect for the international norms
against the use of chemical weapons, and their continuing spread
to new parts of the globe call for urgent action on the part of
all civilized nations. The U.S. believes that the best way to
attack these problems would be to conclude a global treaty
banning chemical weapons. The President's initiative will
significantly advance prospects for such an agreement, and will
challenge other nations to demonstrate their commitment to the
goal of a global CW ban:
©
Many nations, including the Soviet Union, now accept
the principle, proposed by the U.S., of extensive
verification measures, including on-site inspections.
Agreement on the detailed procedures and requirements
for verification will be an important demonstration of
a nation's commitment to the CW ban.
The U.S. has led the way in promoting the openness required for
an effective ban by making public extensive information on the
composition and location of U.S. CW stockpiles and production
facilities. The President is determined to make every effort to
make further improvement in our verification capabilities. The
U.S. has also been in the forefront of efforts to identify and
resolve other outstanding issues:
o
At the Baker-Shevardnadze meeting in Wyoming, the U.S.
reached agreement with the Soviet Union for an exchange
of data on existing CW stockpiles, and on experiments
for inspections of stockpiles and production
facilities, in order to build confidence and gain
valuable experience for a CW Convention;
o
At the Canberra Conference Against Chemical Weapons,
the U.S. announced an initiative for the establishment
of a Technical Experts Group (TEG) in the Conference on
Disarmament to address at this early stage the
technical and scientific questions related to a CW ban.
The President's initiative will significantly advance prospects
for a global agreement to rid the world of chemical weapons. All
nations who share that goal should seize this opportunity.
4 1 1
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
(New York, New York)
EMBARGOED FOR RELEASE
UNTIL 11:45 A.M. EDT
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 1989
ADDRESS BY THE PRESIDENT
TO THE 44TH SESSION
OF THE UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY
United Nations Headquarters
New York, New York
September 25, 1989
Mr. President, Mr. Secretary General, distinguished delegates of
the United Nations: I am honored to speak to you today as you
open the 44th Session of the General Assembly.
I would like to congratulate Joseph Garba of Nigeria -- a
distinguished diplomat -- on his election as President of this
session of the General Assembly, and I wish him success in his
Presidency.
I feel a great personal pleasure on this occasion. This is a
homecoming for me. The memories of my time here in 1971 and 1972
are still with me today -- the human moments -- the humorous
moments -- that are part of even the highest undertaking.
Let me share one story -- from one of the many sessions of the
Security Council. I was 45 minutes late getting to the meeting
-- and all 45 minutes were filled by the first speaker to take
the floor. When I walked in and took my seat, the speaker paused
and said with great courtesy: "I welcome the Permanent
Representative of the United States, and now -- for his benefit
-- I will start my speech again -- from the beginning." At that
moment, differences of alliance and ideology didn't matter. The
universal groan that went up around the table -- from every
member present -- and the laughter that followed -- united us
all.
Today, I would like to begin by recognizing the current permanent
representatives with whom I served. Roberto Martinez-Ordonez.
Blaise Rabetafika. Permanent Observer John Dube.
It's wonderful to look around and see so many familiar faces --
foreign ministers, members of the Secretariat, delegates. And of
course Mr. Secretary General -- you were Permanent Representative
for your country when we served together and Under Secretary Abby
Farah -- you were a Permanent Representative back then, too.
It's an honor to be back with you in this historic hall.
The United Nations was established 44 years ago upon the ashes of
war -- and amidst great hopes. And the United Nations can do
great things. No, the UN isn't perfect. It's not a panacea for
the world's problems. But it is a vital forum where the nations
of the world seek to replace conflict with consensus -- and it
must remain a forum for peace.
- more -
2003
- 2 -
The UN is moving closer to that ideal. And it has the support of
the United States of America. In recent years -- certainly since
my time here -- the war of words that has often echoed in this
chamber is giving way to a new mood. We've seen a welcome shift
-- from polemics to peacekeeping.
UN Peacekeeping forces are on duty right now -- and over the
years, more than 700 Peacekeepers have given their lives in
service to the United Nations. Today, I want to remember one of
these soldiers of peace. An American -- on a mission of peace
under the UN flag -- on a mission for all the world. A man of
unquestioned bravery and unswerving dedication to the UN ideal:
Lt. Col. William Richard Higgins.
I call on the General Assembly to condemn the murder of this
soldier of peace -- and call on those responsible to return his
remains to his family. And let us all right now -- right here --
rededicate ourselves and our nations to the cause that Colonel
Higgins served so selflessly.
The founders of this historic institution believed that it was
here that the nations of the world might come to agree that law
not force -- shall govern. And the United Nations can play a
fundamental role in the central issue of our time. For today,
there is an idea at work around the globe -- an idea of
undeniable force. That idea is: Freedom.
Freedom's advance is evident everywhere. In Central Europe: In
Hungary -- where state and society are now in the midst of a
movement towards political pluralism and a free market economy.
Where the barrier that once enforced an unnatural division
between Hungary and its neighbors to the West has been torn down
-- replaced by a new hope for the future -- new hope in freedom.
We see freedom at work in Poland -- where, in deference to the
will of the people, the Communist Party has relinquished its
monopoly on power. And in the Soviet Union -- where the world
hears the voices of people no longer afraid to speak out, or to
assert the right to rule themselves.
But freedom's march is not confined to a single continent -- or
to the developed world alone.
We see the rise of freedom in Latin America -- where, one by one,
dictatorships are giving way to democracy.
We see it on the continent of Africa -- where more and more
nations see in the system of free enterprise, salvation for
economies crippled by excessive state control.
East and West -- North and South: on every continent, on every
horizon, we can see the outlines of a new world of freedom.
of course, freedom's work: remains unfinished. The trend we see
is not yet universal. regimes still stand against the tide.
Some rulers still deny t1r, right of the people to govern
themselves. But now, the spower of prejudice and despotism is
challenged. Never before have these regimes stood so isolated
and alone -- so out of step with the steady advance of freedom.
Today, we are witnessing an ideological collapse -- the demise of
the totalitarian idea of the omniscient, all-powerful State.
- more -
- 3 -
There are many reasons for this collapse. But in the end, one
fact alone explains what we see today: Advocates of the
totalitarian idea saw its triumph written in the laws of history.
They failed to see the love of freedom written in the human
heart.
Two hundred years ago today, the United States Congress proposed
the Bill of Rights -- fundamental freedoms belonging to every
individual. Rights no government can deny. Those same rights
have been recognized in this congress of nations -- in the words
of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, "a common standard
of achievement for all peoples and all nations."
From where we stand -- on the threshold of this new world of
freedom -- the trend is clear enough. If, for those who write
the history of our times, the 20th century is remembered as the
century of the State -- the 21st must be an era of emancipation
-- the age of the Individual.
Make no mistake: Nothing can stand in the way of freedom's
march. There will come a day when freedom is seen the world over
to be the universal birthright of every man and woman -- of every
race and walk of life. Even under the worst of circumstances, at
the darkest of times, freedom has always remained alive -- a
distant dream, perhaps, but always alive.
Today, that dream is no longer distant. For the first time, for
millions around the world -- a new world of freedom is within
reach. Today -- is freedom's moment.
You see, the possibility now exists for the creation of a true
community of nations -- built on shared interests and ideals. A
true community -- a world where free governments and free markets
meet the rising desire of the people to control their own
destiny: to live in dignity, and to exercise freely their
fundamental human rights.
It is time we worked together to deliver that destiny into the
hands of men and women everywhere.
Our challenge is to strengthen the foundations of freedom --
encourage its advance, and face our most urgent challenges. The
global challenges of the 21st Century: economic health,
environmental well-being, and the great questions of war and
peace.
First, global economic growth. During this decade, a number of
developing nations have moved into the ranks of the world's most
advanced economies -- all of them -- each and every one
-- powered by the engine of free enterprise.
In the decade ahead, others can join their ranks. But -- for
many nations -- barriers stand in the way. In the case of some
countries, these are obstacles of their own making: unnesded
restrictions and regulations that act as dead weights on their
own economies and obstacles to foreign trade.
But other barriers to growth exist, and those too require
effective action. Too many developing countries struggle today
under a burden of debt that makes growth all but impossible. The
nations of the world deserve a better opportunity to achieve a
measure of control over their own economic fate. and build better
lives for their own people.
The approach the U.S. has put forward 00 the Brady Plan -- will
help these nations reduce that debt -- and at the same time
encourage the free market reforms that will fuel growth.
- more -
- 4 -
In just two days I will be speaking to the International Monetary
Fund and World Bank. I'll discuss there in more detail steps our
nations can take in dealing with the debt problem. But I can say
now: The new world of freedom is not a world where a few nations
live in comfort, while others live in want.
The power of commerce is a force for progress. Open markets are
the key to continued growth in the developing world. Today, the
United States buys over one-half of the manufactured exports that
all the developing nations combined sell to the industrialized
world. It's time for the other advanced economies to follow suit
-- to create expanded opportunities for trade.
I believe we'll learn in the century ahead that many nations of
the world have barely begun to tap their true potential for
development. The free market and its fruits are not the special
preserve of a few. They are a harvest everyone can share.
Beyond the challenge of global growth lies another issue of
global magnitude: the environment. No line drawn on a map can
stop the advance of pollution. Threats to our environment have
become an international problem. We must develop an
international approach to urgent environmental issues -- one that
seeks common solutions to common problems.
The United Nations is already at work. On the question of global
warming. In the effort to prevent oil spills and other disasters
from fouling our seas and the air we breathe.
And I will tell you now: The United States will do its part.
We've committed ourselves to the world-wide phase-out of all
chloroflourocarbons by the year 2000. We've proposed amending
our Clean Air Act to ensure clean air for our citizens within a
single generation. We've banned the import of ivory to protect
the elephant and rhinoceros from the human predators who
exterminate them for profit.
And we have begun to explore ways to work with other nations --
with the major industrialized democracies, in Poland and in
Hungary -- to make common cause for the sake of our environment.
The environment belongs to all of us. In our new world of
freedom, the world's citizens must enjoy this common trust for
generations to come.
Global economic growth -- the stewardship of our planet -- both
are critical issues. But as always, questions of war and peace
must be paramount to the United Nations.
We must move forward to limit -- and eliminate -- weapons of mass
destruction. Five years ago, at the UN Conference on Disarmament
in Geneva, I presented a U.S. draft treaty outlawing chemical
weapons. Since then, progress has been made -- but time is
running out. The threat is growing. More than 20 nations now
possess chemical weapons or the capability to produce them. ANY
these horrible weapons are now finding their way into regional
conflicts. This is unacceptable.
For the sake of mankind, we must halt and reverse this threat.
Today, I want to announce steps the U.S. is ready to take --
steps to rid the world of these truly terrible weapons -- towards
a treaty that will ban, eliminate, all chemical weapons from the
earth ten years from the day it is signed.
- more -
€ JUC
- 5 -
This initiative contains three major elements:
First, in the first eight years of a chemical weapons treaty, the
U.S. is ready to destroy nearly all -- 98% -- of our chemical
weapons -- stockpile -- provided the Soviet Union joins the ban.
I think they will.
Second, we are ready to destroy all of our chemical weapons --
100%, every one -- within ten years, once all nations capable of
building chemical weapons sign the total ban treaty.
And third, the U.S. is ready to begin now. We'll eliminate more
than 80% of our stockpile -- even as we work to complete a treaty
-- if the Soviet Union joins us in cutting chemical weapons to an
equal level, and we agree on inspections to verify that
stockpiles are destroyed.
We know that monitoring a total ban on chemical weapons will be a
challenge. But the knowledge we've gained from our recent arms
control experience -- and our accelerating research in this area
-- makes me believe we can achieve the level of verification that
gives us confidence to go forward with the ban.
The world has lived too long in the shadow of chemical warfare.
Let us act together -- beginning today -- to rid the earth of
this scourge.
We are serious about achieving conventional arms reductions as
well. That's why we tabled new proposals just last Thursday at
the Conventional Forces in Europe negotiations in Vienna --
proposals that demonstrate our commitment to act rapidly to ease
military tensions in Europe, and move the nations of that
continent one step closer to their common destiny: a Europe
whole and free.
And the United States is convinced that open and innovative
measures can move disarmament forward -- and also ease
international tensions. That's the idea behind the Open Skies
proposal the Soviets have now indicated they are willing to
pursue. It's the idea behind the Open Lands proposal --
permitting, for the first time ever, free travel for all Soviet
and American diplomats throughout each other's countries.
Openness is the enemy of mistrust -- and every step towards a
more open world is a step towards the new world we seek.
And let me make this comment on our meetings with Soviet Foreign
Minister Shevardnadze over the past few days. I am very pleased
by the progress we made. The Soviet Union removed a number of
obstacles to progress on conventional and strategic arms
reductions. We reached agreements in principle on issues
from verification to nuclear testing. And of course, we agreed
to a summit in the spring or early summer of 1990.
Each of these achievements is important in its own right -- but
thev are more important still as signs of a new attitude that
prevails between the U.S. and USSR. Serious differences semain
-- but the willingness to deal constructively and candidly --
with those differences is news that we -- and indeed the world --
must welcome.
We have not entered an era of perpetual peace. The threats to
peace that nations face may today be changing -- but they have
not vanished. In fact, in a number of regions around the world,
a dangerous combination is now emerging: Regimes armed with old
and unappeasable animosities -- and modern weapons of mass
destruction.
- more -
- 6 -
This development will raise the stakes whenever war breaks out.
Regional conflict may well threaten world peace as never before.
The challenge of preserving peace is a personal one for all of
you here in this hall. The United Nations can be a mediator -- a
forum where parties in conflict come in search of peaceful
solutions.
For the sake of peace, the UN must redouble its support for the
peace efforts now underway in regions of conflict all over the
world. And let me assure you: The U.S. is determined to take an
active role in settling regional conflicts. Sometimes, our role
in regional disputes is and will be highly public. Sometimes,
like many of you, we work quietly -- behind the scenes.' But
always -- we are working for positive change and lasting peace.
Our world faces other, less conventional threats -- no less
dangerous to international peace and stability. Illegal drugs
are a menace to social order and a source of human misery
wherever they gain a foothold. The nations who suffer this
scourge must join forces in the fight. And we are. Let me
salute the commitment and extraordinary courage of one country in
particular -- Colombia -- where we are working with the people
and their President, Virgilio Barco, to put the drug cartels out
of business, and bring the drug lords to justice.
Finally, we must join forces to combat the threat of terrorism.
Every nation -- and the United Nations -- must send the outlaws
of the world a clear message: Hostage taking and the terror of
random violence are methods that cannot win the world's approval.
Terrorism of any kind is repugnant to all values a civilized
world holds in common. And make no mistake: Terrorism is a
means that no end -- no matter how just -- can sanctify.
Whatever the challenge, freedom greatly raises the chances of our
success. Freedom's moment is a time of hope for all the world.
Because freedom -- once set in motion -- takes on a momentum of
its own.
As I said the day I assumed the Presidency: "We don't have to
talk late into the night about which form of government is
better." We know that free government -- democracy -- is best.
I believe that is the hard-won truth of our time -- the
unassailable fact that still stands at the end of a century of
great struggle and human suffering.
And this is true not because all our differences must give way to
democracy but because democracy makes room for all our
differences. In democracy, diversity finds its common home.
At the very heart of the democratic ideal is respect -- for
freedom of belief, freedom of thought and action in all its
diversity -- for human rights. The world has experienced enough
of the ideologies that have promised to remake man in some new
and better image. We've seen the colossal tragedies and dashed
hopes. we know now that freedom and democracy hold the answers,
What men and nations want is the freedom to live by their own
lights, and a chance to prosper in peace.
When I began today, I spoke to you about peacekeeping. I want to
speak to you now about peacemaking. We must bring peace to the
people who have never known its blessings.
- more -
- 7 -
There's a painting that hangs on the wall of my office in the
White House. It pictures President Lincoln and his generals,
meeting near the end of a war that remains the bloodiest in
American history. Outside, at that moment, a battle rages. And
yet what we see in the distance is a rainbow -- a symbol of hope,
of the passing of the storm. That painting is called "The
Peacemakers." For me, it is a constant reminder that our
struggle -- the struggle for peace -- is a struggle blessed by
hope.
I do remember sitting in this hall. I remember the mutual
respect among all of us proudly serving as representatives. I
remember the almost endless speeches, Security Council sessions.
The receptions and receiving lines. The formal meetings of this
Assembly -- and the informal discussions in the Delegates'
Lounge.
And I remember something more. Something beyond the frantic pace
and sometimes frustrating experiences of daily life here: The
heartbeat of the United Nations -- the quiet conviction that we
could make the world more peaceful. More free.
What we sought then, now lies within our reach. I ask each of
you here in this hall: Can we not bring d unity of purpose to
the United Nations? Can we not make this new world of freedom
the common destiny we seek?
I believe we can. I know we must.
My solemn wish today is that here -- among the United Nations --
that spirit will take hold, and that all men and all nations will
make freedom's moment their own.
Thank you, God bless you, and may God bless the work of the
United Nations.
# # #
Promoting Freedom and Peace: The United States Approach
to Arms Control and East-West Relations
An Address by Ambassador Edward L. Rowny
Special Advisor to the President
and Secretary of State for Arms Control Matters
Solidarity Parliamentary Club
Warsaw, Poland - October 13, 1989
The United States is now facing what Secretary of State Baker has called the
"challenge of change" in the political and military developments facing the United
States around the globe. To meet this challenge the United States will pursue prudent
and realistic policies. We will rely on the proven policies that have contributed SO
fundamentally to America's foreign policy success, and to the improvement of relations
with the Soviet Union.
We will continue to build relations with the Soviet Union on a solid foundation.
President Bush is fortunate in that he has not had to reconstruct our relations with the
Soviet Union from the ground up. Rather, he has inherited a strong foundation which
he helped to build in eight years as Vice President. This foundation is a broad agenda
for US-Soviet relations, which incorporates human rights questions; bilateral issues
between us and the Soviets; regional conflicts such as Afghanistan, Cambodia, and
Central America; transnational issues such as the environment; and arms control.
Arms control is not the centerpiece of US-Soviet affairs, since arms control treats the
symptoms, not the causes, of East-West tension. Arms control is not soundly based if
pursued as an end in itself. It is but one part of a larger agenda that places our
dealings with the Soviet Union into balance and perspective.
In order to fulfill the promise of the current period we will continue to deal with the
Soviet Union from a position of strength. The Soviets respect strength, and they abhor
weakness. Far from jeopardizing our relations with the USSR, a sustained United
States defense effort prepares the ground for a better relationship. It is a tangible
demonstration to Soviet leaders that they cannot secure an advantage by military
means. Our continued strength will convince the Soviet leadership that the United
States will not abandon a task half finished, that we will not abide a return to old-style
Soviet expansion.
President Bush has called for a policy of moving beyond containment of the Soviet
Union to a new era of cooperation based on respect for personal freedom and the rule of
law. Ending the artificial division of Europe is one of the top priorities on the
President's international agenda. For only when Europe is whole and free again can we
pronounce the Cold War over.
Since Mikhail Gorbachev came to power in the Soviet Union in 1985, I have taken
part in some two dozen foreign ministers' meetings and four summits. The contrast
between four years ago and now is dramatic. In the beginning, Gorbachev and
Shevardnadze refused to discuss any items other than arms control. We persisted with
our objective and over time got the Soviets gradually to transform their approach. Now
the Soviets engage us on all five points of the broad agenda. This more balanced
approach has borne fruit for arms control.
The Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, now in force, is bringing
about the elimination of an entire class of nuclear missiles. Its unprecedented,
intrusive verification measures, moreover, are giving us
-2-
valuable field experience toward the much more difficult task of effectively
verifying a Strategic Arms Reduction (START) Treaty.
I will have more to say later about START, but first I would like to tell you
about President Bush's political, social and arms control initiatives for healing the
division of Europe.
Freedom and Security for Europe, East and West
At-NATO's 40th anniversary summit last May, the President challenged the
alliance to undertake a broad plan for making all of Europe once again whole and
free. Specifically, he made the following proposals:
1. Strengthen and broaden the Conference on Security and Cooperation in
Europe (CSCE) in its work on economic, human rights and security matters.
Intensify the efforts of Western democratic political parties to help the coalescing
political opposition in Eastern Europe develop the democratic process.
2. Remove the Wall and bring glasnost to East Berlin. Berlin is where the
division of Europe is seen most clearly and brutally.
3. Work together on environmental problems, with the U.S. extending
technical assistance to East European countries plagued by pollution.
4. Accelerate a NATO-Warsaw Pact agreement for deep reductions in
conventional forces. Our key objectives in the Conventional Forces in Europe
(CFE) talks are to:
**
Eliminate the capability for surprise attack and large scale offensive
action;
**
Remove the major source of military instability on the European
continent: the threat posed by excessively large, offensively configured
forces of the Warsaw Pact, especially forward deployed Soviet forces; and
**
Concentrate on reducing those weapons that are best suited for surprise
attack and offensive operations: tanks, artillery, armored troop carriers,
and combat aircraft and helicopters. The Warsaw Pact has indicated
willingness to make deep, asymmetrical cuts in these systems, and we are
seeking to lock it into a firm commitment.
The President proposed further that US and Soviet troops based on foreign soil
in Europe be limited to 275,000 each -- a cut of 30,000 from current US levels and
325,000 from Soviet levels. All withdrawn troops would be demobilized, and all
reduced weapons would be destroyed. The President ended by challenging NATO
and Warsaw Pact negotiators to complete a CFE treaty within one year -- a
challenge we are glad to see has been embraced by both sides.
When the CFE talks resumed in September, NATO tabled its proposals on
information exchange, stabilizing measures, verification, and non-circumvention.
A formal response from the East is eagerly awaited. We were happy to see the
Warsaw Pact move closer to NATO's position on combat aircraft although its
position continues to reflect a narrower definition than that used by NATO. Good
progress is being made and will be sustained if both sides work constructively and
with a sense of urgency.
Verification Will Expedite START
In Geneva we now are engaged in two important sets of talks on strategic
programs, the START talks and the Defense and Space Talks.
-3-
In START, we and the Soviets have agreed in principle to stabilizing
reductions in each side's long-range nuclear forces. But reductions are not the
whole story. Indeed, it is possible to cut weapons and end up with a more
dangerous situation if the resulting balance of forces is improperly structured. In
time of crisis, a relative advantage on one side -- or the perceived vulnerability of
the other's retaliatory forces could put a premium on striking first. This is why
one of the key criteria for resolving the remaining details in START is whether
they will enhance stability, that is, strengthen deterrence by ensuring that no first
strike can succeed.
President Bush's first major initiative in START has been to put verification on
the front burner. He proposes that we and the Soviets work out certain verification
and stability measures for START, and implement them as soon as possible, even
before a START treaty enters into force. The President is seeking both to expedite
START and to ensure that any treaty he signs will be effectively verifiable.
Verification is one of the most complex issues in the START negotiations. We
made a quantum leap in verification with the INF Treaty's provisions for baseline
and short notice on-site inspections, and portal monitoring of missile facilities. But
verification of START, compared to INF, is considerably more difficult. While INF
provided for the complete elimination of limited types of missile systems and
banned their production, deployment, and testing, in START the problem is both
different and harder.
Production, deployment and modernization of strategic weapons will continue
under START. START also includes other constraints, like a limit on ballistic
missile throw-weight. We will have to keep track of specific numbers of disparate
weapons, some of which are mobile. So a high priority will be placed on satisfying
our concerns about the possible acquisition by the Soviets of a covert strategic force
and resulting Soviet capability to violate or break out of a START agreement.
Including certain verification techniques in an agreement does not necessarily
make that agreement effectively verifiable. Simply having the right to on-site
inspection does not mean inspections will automatically yield relevant
information. What is required is a comprehensive system of verification
procedures, based on a detailed exchange of data, incorporating unhindered
national technical means of verification, on-site inspection, continuous monitoring
of key ballistic missile production facilities, and clear rules covering the permitted
disposition of limited systems. This verification system must also allow each side
to protect its sensitive facilities from unwarranted scrutiny. Developing such a
system takes time and effort.
In verification, as in other endeavors, practice makes perfect. The highly
useful experience we have gained implementing the INF Treaty shows there is no
substitute for hands-on experience. Exploring, developing, and practicing methods
of verification early in the negotiating process can help prevent glitches that could
delay a treaty.
One such problem arose in INF when the Soviets told us late in the game that
the first stage of the prohibited SS-20 was "outwardly similar" to that of the
permitted SS-25. Eventually we were able to solve this problem, but dry run
inspections and an early data exchange could have expedited the development of a
way to deal with it. Field experience in verifying a future START Treaty -- for
example, monitoring the production of ballistic missiles or inspecting the number of
warheads on a missile -- can help prevent such problems. It can also help ensure
that talk around the negotiating table doesn't result in a commitment to procedures
of little or no practical utility.
-4-
Because START deals with the core of the US deterrent -- our strategic forces --
it is critical to our security. Verification is critical to knowing that reductions that
would be agreed upon in a START Treaty, the text of which now runs 400-plus
pages, would be implemented faithfully especially in light of the poor Soviet
record on compliance. This is the key to the benefits of increased security,
stability, and predictability that a well-constructed arms control agreement can
provide.
Some critics of the President's initiative allege it is intended to stall
negotiations and delay agreement. This is nonsense. A positive Soviet response to
implement the US proposal would accelerate the START process. The critics argue
in effect that it is more important to sign an agreement quickly than to see to it
that arms reductions actually take place verifiably. If arms reduction is a serious
enough matter to warrant concluding a treaty carrying the weight of domestic and
international law, then effective verification must be taken just as seriously.
Prudence dictates that we must not rest a matter as critical as our national
security on Soviet promises.
Finally, verification is an important buttress of domestic support for arms
control's role in our national security policy. A replay of the divisive debate that
occurred over the SALT II Treaty would not be in the interests of the US, of our
allies, or of US-Soviet relations. Effective verification is an essential criterion in
determining whether a START treaty will be signed by the President and ratified
by the Senate.
Putting verification on the front burner shows that the President is serious
about reaching a START treaty that is in the US national interest. Soviet
agreement to make a special effort to develop and put into practice ways of
verifying START limits would be a positive sign that "new thinking" translates into
action.
In Geneva the Soviets were not prepared to engage on the verification and
stability measures. At the Wyoming ministerial in September, the sides signed an
umbrella agreement which in principle commits both to making concrete progress
on specific verification and stability measures. Those now under discussion
include: early data exchange; halting denial of ballistic missile telemetry data;
establishment of perimeter/portal monitoring of certain ballistic missile production
facilities; addressing the problem of short-time-of-flight submarine-launched
ballistic missiles; procedures for ballistic missile re-entry vehicle inspections;
briefing and demonstrations of "tagging" missiles with unique identifiers. We hope
the Soviets will engage more constructively on these measures during the current
Geneva round.
Transition to Strategic Defenses
In the Defense and Space Talks, our negotiators are making the case for
strategic defense. We want to pave the way for a cooperative transition to a world
in which effective defenses against ballistic missile attack play an increasing role
in assuring deterrence. To this end, we have introduced a draft treaty building on
the agreement reached between President Reagan and General Secretary
Gorbachev at the Washington Summit in December 1987. We aim in these talks to
protect our right to investigate defensive technologies and preserve our options to
deploy strategic defenses when they are ready.
Last month at the Wyoming ministerial, the Soviets dropped their insistence
that they would not sign a START treaty unless we agreed to cripple or kill our SDI
program. Though this removes an artificial barrier to the START agreement, make
no mistake: The Soviets still want to kill or cripple SDI. Instead of engaging us on
our Defense and Space draft treaty which in
-5-
effect amends the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty to permit a transition to
strategic defenses, the Soviets want to hold us to even stricter limits on defense
than the original ABM Treaty prescribed.
The Soviets do not oppose the idea of strategic defenses; they only oppose the
U.S. acquiring a defensive system. Unlike some theorists in my own country, the
Soviets do not put their faith in offense alone but in a combination of defense and
offense. The Soviets never have subscribed to the theory of Mutual Assured
Destruction (MAD). They have the world's only deployed strategic defenses and are
spending an estimated eight to 10 times as much as the U.S. for strategic defense.
Moscow has great respect for our technological prowess. The Soviets realize
that the United States has a comparative advantage over them in technology.
Accordingly, they work in the negotiating process to limit us whenever possible.
SDI has the same purpose as sound arms control, namely to enhance stability
and reduce the risk of war. Today, the threat of retaliation is our sole means of
deterring a nuclear attack. A layered system of space and ground based defenses,
however, would strengthen deterrence while threatening no one. Effective ballistic
missile defenses would shatter Soviet war planners' confidence of being able to
succeed with an ICBM first strike. A strategy relying increasingly on defenses
would solve problems that purely retaliatory strategy has been unable to deal with
satisfactorily. Effective defenses are our only sure protection against mobile
missiles, which are difficult to target with offensive forces.
We believe the case for offensive reductions is strengthened by effective
strategic defenses. As we make reductions in strategic offensive forces, the impact
of cheating and breakout potential magnifies. Strategic defenses would act as an
insurance policy against these threats. As we look to the future, our security will
grow increasingly reliant on strategic defenses.
Meanwhile we no longer can afford to consider strategic defenses exclusively in
terms of the U.S.-Soviet superpower relationship. It would be naive to assume that
the current situation where the only substantial ballistic missile threat to the
U.S. stems from the Soviet Union -- will continue into the 21st century. Capability
to produce ballistic missiles is no longer "high" technology. It is becoming
accessible to a growing number of countries, some with dangerously unstable
governments. Reliable estimates predict that within a little over a decade 15
developing nations might have the capability to launch ballistic missiles.
Curbing the Chemical Weapons Threat
Chemical weapon proliferation is another concern on a par with the spread of
ballistic missile technology. As the Iran-Iraq war showed, the taboo against
chemical warfare is not as strong as we imagined. Chemical weapons could become
a cheap and widely available "poor man's atomic bomb." The combination of
ballistic missiles and chemical weapons coming into the possession of the same
people who today have no compunction about blowing up airliners filled with
innocent passengers should galvanize our will to develop missile defenses.
The chemical weapons threat is such a danger that President Bush has
redoubled United States efforts to ban these weapons. U.S. and Soviet bilateral
discussions on this problem yielded a very helpful memorandum of understanding,
on the exchange of data, signed in Wyoming by Minister Shevardnadze and
Secretary Baker.
-6-
In a speech to the United Nations General Assembly on September 25,
President Bush reaffirmed the U.S. commitment to a multilateral treaty that
would completely eliminate chemical weapons (CW) in 10 years, provided that all
states with chemical weapons capability become party to the treaty. The President
proposed the following initiatives to give new impetus to the negotiations:
* The U.S. will destroy more than 98 percent of its current CW stockpile within
eight years after entry into force of a multilateral CW treaty, provided the
Soviet Union also is a party.
* The remaining 2 percent would be destroyed in the following two years after
all CW-capable countries become parties to the treaty.
*
While working to complete a global CW treaty, the U.S. will propose to the
Soviet Union that the two countries agree to the destruction of a major portion
of their respective CW stockpiles down to equal levels. This destruction would
be on mutually agreed terms and must include far-reaching verification
provisions.
* The U.S. will accelerate and significantly expand its efforts to improve
verification capabilities.
Conclusion
In conclusion, I want to stress again that while arms control is important, it
must not be pursued as an end in itself. Peace is not the mere absence of war.
Neither is true peace achieved through the narrow pursuit of arms control. The
United States still adheres to the approach of our great President Ronald Reagan,
who summarized our policy with an aphorism. "Nations do not mistrust one
another because they have arms"; he said. "They have arms because they mistrust
one another." Our international aim is to lessen the threats posed not only from
military violence but also from tyranny and oppression.
MK- -
hold for
Foreign
awhile
Policy
Will Toby Chris Winston
Ok as marked will Toby
389
x 2930
Rm 121
TALKING POINTS ON THE STRATEGIC DEFENSE INITIATIVE
*
The President is committed to the development and deployment
of Strategic Defenses when they are ready.
*
By developing the means to defend against ballistic missiles
that threaten us, we also lessen the incentives for
aggression thus enhancing stability and deterrence.
*
The primary issues concerning SDI can generally be
categorized as technological strategic, political and
economic.
Technology and SDI
*
Though many complex scientific and engineering problems
remain, there appear to be no technological show-stoppers
for SDI.
5
*
In some area, such as kinetic kill, important technological
advances have been achieved. A system popularly known as
Brilliant Pebbles is one example.
attack
Strategy and SDI
*
SDI's ultimate goal is to deter a Hack on the U.S. and its
allies by the devaluation in the strategic utility of
ballistic missiles.
*
We are seeking a more stable balance that relies
increasingly on defense. It would be preferable, but not
necessary, if the Soviets would work with us to develop a
cooperative arrangement for making this transition.
*
Progress on strategic offensive arms reductions and
strategic defense are not mutually exclusive -- on the
contrary, START and SDI are complementary.
** In general, the more progress we make toward offensive
reductions, the more SDI will help us deter, or deal
with, possible Soviet cheating or breakout. SDI is an
insurance policy for START.
*** First, the Soviets' largely modern land-based ICBM
force is projected to ensure them a first-strike
capability well into the 21st century. A
reasonably reliable system of strategic defenses
would increase our security in the face of this
ICBM threat. 68
P12 21
2
*** Second, the U.S. would be better able to deal with
the problem of Soviet mobile ICBMs. SDI would
complement a mobile verification regime in START
that has many unresolved and important details.
*** Third, the sheer complexity of the proposed START
treaty will probably result in unavoidable
loopholes that arms control on its own cannot
plug. In turn, this situation would jeopardize
treaty ratification. Strategic defenses could
help plug the loopholes
*
Finally, Strategic Defense could be the only thoroughly
reliable way to address the problem of accidental,
unauthorized, or "madman" launches of ballistic missiles.
**
Concerns are no longer hypothetical. The Director of
Central Intelligence, William Webster, testified
recently that up to 15 developing nations could have a
ballistic launch capability by the turn of the century.
** The instability of many regimes raises another
frightening scenario -- who has authority to release
missiles during periods of intense civil strife? As
the nuclear and chemical club grows, this question will
be asked more often.
** Controlling missile technology from the supply side is
not enough -- ultimately we must also have the
capability to defend ourselves against ballistic
missiles.
** Defending other countries against rogue launches is
another possible use of a U.S. space-based defense.
Politics and Economics of SDI
action
by
*
The recent recommendation by the majority of the members of
the House Armed Services Committee to cut the SDI budget by
almost
over a billion dollars is a shortsighted move.
two
*
Just at the time American ingenuity is starting to produce
technological breakthroughs, SDI opponents are trying to
reduce the funding to a level which could not sustain a
viable program.
*
Strategic modernization and strategic defense should not be
allowed to become an either/or proposition -- as pointed out
above, offenses and defenses are synergistic.
3
What Next?
*
In order to make a sound deployment decision in three or
four years, the President must be able to depend on the
results of his carefully designed research and development
program. It must be adequately funded.
*
The program schedule for the next two years includes a
number of very important tests and experiments. These
include:
** The first-ever test of a Neutral Particle Beam in
Space.
** Space tests of tracking, pointing, sensor, and
communications technologies.
** Numerous interceptor tests for kinetic kill systems
such as Brilliant Pebbles.
*
All these early tests comply with the ABM Treaty.
Bottom Line
*
SDI is one of several answers to the many strategic problems
the U.S. faces going into the next century.
** SDI would dramatically reduce the risk of nuclear war
by denying an aggressor the confidence or incentive --
to execute a first strike.
** SDI would provide the American people with much-needed
insurance against an accidental or inadvertent attack
or against a deliberate launch by an irrational
government.
*
The Bush Administration continues to believe that strategic
defense is technologically feasible, strategically
necessary, and morally imperative.
ater
completely competible with our strategic and arms control
objectives.
House
the
Beyond
Containment
EXCERPTS FROM THE SPEECHES OF PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH
ON EUROPE AND EAST-WEST RELATIONS
APRIL 17 . MAY 31, 1989
"We seek the integration of the Soviet Union
into the community of nations"
President Bush speaking at Texas A&M University,
OF
THE UNITED PR THE 30 STATES ATES
ESE
The winds of change are shaping a
The United States now has as its goal much
new European destiny. Western Europe
more than simply containing Soviet
is resurgent, and Eastern Europe is
expansionism. We seek the integration of the
awakening to yearnings for democracy,
Soviet Union into the community of nations.
independence and prosperity. In the
As the Soviet Union itself moves toward
Soviet Union itself, we are encouraged
greater openness and democratization, as
by the sound of voices long silent and
they meet the challenge of responsible
the sight of the rulers consulting the
international behavior, we will match their
ruled. We see new thinking in some
steps with steps of our own. "
aspects of Soviet foreign policy. We are
TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY
hopeful that these stirrings presage
COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS
May 12. 1989
meaningful, lasting and more far-
reaching change
The grand strategy of the West during
Let no one doubt the sincerity of
the postwar period has been based on the
the American people and their
concept of containment: checking the
government in our desire to see reform
Soviet Union's expansionist aims And
succeed inside the Soviet Union. We
now we have a precious opportunity to
welcome the changes that have taken
move beyond containment where the
place, and we will continue to
opportunity for peace-world peace,
encourage greater recognition of
lasting peace-has never been better. "
President Bush greets a young resident of
human rights, market incentives and
the Polish-American community of
COAST GUARD ACADEMY
free elections. "
NEW LONDON, CONNECTICUT
Hamtramck, Michigan.
May 24. 1989
HAMTRAMCK, MICHIGAN
April 17, 1989
Bush Urges Force Cuts in Europe
President Briefs NATO Allies, Foresees No 'Peace Dividend'
wp 12-5-89 A)
By David Hoffman and Ann Devroy
Recalling his eight hours of talks
Bush pledged in a joint news con-
Washington Post Staft Writers
with Gorbachev aboard a Soviet
ference with Gorbachev on Sunday
BRUSSELS, Dec. -President
cruise liner, Bush said he gained
that he would encourage Soviet in-
Bush called today for a renewed
new insights about Gorbachev's
tegration into the global economy in
drive by U.S. allies to complete ne-
intentions as a reformer. While
"every way I can." But today he
gotiations on reducing conventional
skeptics have questioned whether
stopped short of extending an invi-
forces in Europe but warned against
Gorbachev can succeed and how
tation to Gorbachev to attend next
any "rush to throw off defense bur-
long he can persevere in the daunt-
year's summit of the seven leading
dens" and said there would not be a
ing task of restructuring Soviet so-
industrial democracies, scheduled
"peace dividend" any time soon
ciety, Bush declared, "I'm con-
to be held in Houston. "Two
from the thaw in superpower rela-
vinced that he is determined to do
chances, slim to none, for that par-
tions.
what he told me he's doing—
ticular meeting," Bush said. When a
In a report to leaders of the
reform, perestroika, openness
reporter noted that the economic
North Atlantic Treaty Organization
following his weekend summit with
Bush said Gorbachev "seemed very
summit will follow the U.S.-Soviet
summit now scheduled for late
Soviet President Mikhail Gorba-
much in control" during the talks.
chev, Bush said the alliance must
"He seemed-subdued is the wrong
June, Bush said, "I don't think it's
"seize this urgent opportunity" for a
word, but I would say determined
likely that he would hang around
conventional forces pact, now being
and unemotional about it."
Houston waiting for the next meet-
negotiated in Vienna. "If we in this
Bush said Gorbachev's willing-
ing."
alliance are not equal to the
ness to let the East European re-
Gorbachev this year wrote a let-
changes that are going on in Europe
form efforts continue was the major
ter to French President Francois
around us," he said, the "process
factor that persuaded him the time
Mitterrand, who hosted the 1989
could be overrun by events. That
had come to cooperate more openly
economic summit, indicating a de-
could be dangerous and we must
with Moscow. Earlier, Bush and his
sire for closer association with the
avoid it."
advisers had been hesitant about
Western industrial powers.
dealing with Gorbachev, but the
Bush told the allied leaders that
Bush said he had an "open mind"
president said his views changed "as
he had made a counter-suggestion
about the possibility of negotiating
I watched the way in which Mr.
to Gorbachev's proposal for a new
even lower levels of conventional
Gorbachev has handled the changes
35-nation summit on the future of
forces in Europe, as Gorbachev sug-
in Eastern Europe."
Europe. According to a text of
gested at the summit, but stressed
that the current round of negotia-
"It deserves new thinking. It ab-
Bush's remarks to the leaders, he
tions, known as the Conventional
solutely mandates new thinking.
said he suggested that the existing
Forces in Europe (CFE) talks, must
And when I see his willingness to
Conference on Security and Coop-
be completed first. At the Malta
give support to a CFE agreement
eration in Europe (CSCE) be used
summit, Bush and Gorbachev said
that calls for him to disproportion-
to "breathe new life" into economic
they would like to sign a treaty be-
ately reduce his forces, and that is
development. Bush said he sug-
fore the end of next year.
there on the table, I think that man-
gested to Gorbachev that the CSCE
The president, speaking to re-
dates new thinking. When I hear
porters, said he would like to put
him talk about peaceful change and
this negotiation "in the bank first,
the right of countries to choose,
get it locked up, get those troops
that deserves new thinking," he
out." He promised to "kick our bu-
said.
reaucracy and push it as fast as I.
possibly can."
Bush said he now approaches
Bush appeared confident after a
Gorbachev "with a certain respect
day of talks with allied leaders that
for what he's doing, and thus we
was dominated by the upheaval in
want to try to meet him on some of
East Germany and the possibility of
the areas where he needs help."
its reunification with West Ger-
The president acknowledged,
many. Asked whether he agrees
however, that all was not "sweet-
with his ambassador to West Ger-
ness and light" in the discussions
about Soviet policy. Recounting the
many, Vernon Walters, that reuni-
objections he raised about Eastern
fication is inevitable and likely with-
Bloc arms shipments through Cuba
in five years, Bush responded that
to Nicaragua, and the arms pipeline
he prefers not to set deadlines. He
to rebels in El Salvador, Bush said,
then read a portion of his own state-
ment to the allied leaders, in which
he called for a series of principles to
"I would like to see him use his in-
guide reunification, including that it
fluence with Mr. [Fidel] Castro, and
"should occur in the context of Ger-
if he's got any left, with Mr. [Dan-
many's continued commitment to
iel] Ortega, to facilitate democratic
NATO and an increasingly inte-
change in the Western Hemi-
sphere."
grated European Community."
The Soviets have emphasized
Bush said he did not know to
their desire to keep the two Ger-
what extent Gorbachev could influ-
manys separate, at least for now.
ence Ortega, Nicaragua's president.
Although Bush promised Gorba-
Bush and Baker said after the sum-
chev that the West would not at-
mit that Soviet officials had told
tempt to exploit the collapse of
them that Moscow was pressing
hard-line Communist regimes in
Nicaragua's Sandinista leaders and
Eastern Europe-he said he would
Cuba's President Castro to halt the
arms shipments.
not "dance on the Berlin Wall"-
Secretary of State James A. Baker
III will visit West Berlin next week
for an address on the changes in
Europe, the State Department an-
nounced today.
process, which grew out of the
prospects for still-deeper reduc-
1975 Helsinki conference, be used
tions in U.S. troops in Europe or
to focus on "the practical questions
cuts in defense budgets by either
involved in the transition from stag-
the United States or West Euro-
nant planned economies to free and
pean governments.
competitive markets."
"We must stand together," he
Bush repeatedly emphasized his
insisted, "for negotiated, coordinat-
desire to use existing European in-
ed, stabilizing reductions against a
stitutions to "manage" the changes
rush to throw off defense burdens,
on the continent, and he said the
against a return to the narrow pro-
CSCE "is a structure that should be
tection of self-interests that could
able to contribute much to the fu-
be so dangerous at a time when Eu-
ture architecture of Europe."
ropean politics are in a state of flux
Bush opened his remarks to the
rivaled in my adult life only by the
allied leaders by saying he wanted
immediate aftermath of the Second
to talk about "the new Europe and
World War."
the new Atlanticism," which he said
While Defense Secretary Richard
would be distinguished by the goals
B. Cheney has publicly discussed
of "self-determination and individual
the possibility of defense spending
freedom everywhere" replacing "co-
cuts as a result of a reduced Soviet
ercion and tyranny," and where
military threat, Bush said, "I think it
"economic liberty everywhere re-
is premature to speak, as some are
places economic controls and stag-
at home, about a 'peace dividend'-
nation."
take a lot of money out of defense
While outlining his view of the
and put it into other worthy
future, Bush also prodded the allied
causes."
leaders to move swiftly on the ne-
Asked when he envisioned that
gotiations to reduce conventional
reduced tensions with the Soviet
forces in Europe. When Bush of-
Union would produce extra funds
fered his conventional arms initia-
for needs at home, Bush said, "I
tive at the NATO summit last May,
don't want to hold out to those that
many specialists said his timetable
want to rush out and spend a lot
was unrealistic. Today, Bush ac-
more money the hope that this is
knowledged that progress was lag-
going to happen."
ging.
Bush shrugged off questions
"We have made good progress"
about whether he had taken any
since the effort was launched, he
unnecessary risks by going out to
said, "but too little and too slowly to
the USS Belknap on Saturday in the
take full advantage of the opportu-
midst of a gale-force windstorm
nity before us: the chance to ease
that trapped him there.
the Soviet army out of Eastern Eu-
"Don't tell me that little chop was
rope and substantially reduce the
risking anything," he said. "I haven't
risk of surprise attack and aggres-
had that much fun in a long time."
sion."
He said the 50-knot winds didn't
Bush told the allied leaders that
bother him and "in fact, we had a
they all "need to remain fixed on
very relaxed evening out there."
this goal and reenergize our bu-
Asked if he wasn't "hot-dogging,"
reaucracies and negotiators to seize
Bush made fun of his own penchant
this urgent opportunity."
for caution and prudence. "Hot-
Even as he emphasized the need
dogging? No," he said. "Well, you
for progress in this area, Bush was
know, these charismatic, macho,
characteristically cautious about the
visionary guys, they'll do anything."
Bush Confident He Struck
Right Balance at the Summit
By ANDREW ROSENTHAL
A17
Special to The New York Times
BRUSSELS, Dec. 4
President
decoupling of the United States and
Bush ended the Malta summit talks
Canada from NATO at this critical
confident that he had shown global
time." Mr. Gorbachev, he said, "under-
leadership while not angering a West-
stood that."
ern alliance resistant to American
During the summit meeting, Mr.
dominance in world affairs, Adminis-
Bush seemed to take a considerably
tration officials said today.
milder tone toward Soviet behavior in
In the Administration's view, a sen-
regional conflicts than was struck by
ior official said, Mr. Bush could claim
Mr. Reagan and even by some Admin-
credit for opening the way to improve-
istration officials before they went to
ments in economic relations and arms
Malta.
control with the Soviets, even though
A senior official said today that the
those changes were seen as largely
United States remained deeply con-
inevitable and likely to provide more
cerned about Soviet support for Nica-
benefit than cost to the United States.
ragua and about arms shipments to the
In his two days of talks with Mr. Gor-
leftist rebels in El Salvador, which
bachev, officials said, Mr. Bush was
Washington says are being provided by
able to offer Mikhail S. Gorbachev
the Sandinista Government in Mana-
trade concessions and assurances of
gua. But he said American officials be-
technical support without committing
lieved that they had much to gain from
American money to an uncertain eco-
trying to work with the Soviet Union on
nomic future in the Soviet Union.
Middle Eastern, African, Asian and
On the arms control front, they said
even Central American issues.
Mr. Bush's proposals answered com-
This explains Mr. Bush's purpose in
plaints that the United States was slip-
trying to separate American attitudes
ping from the leadership of the North
toward the Sandinistas from the
Atlantic Treaty Organization. But at
Soviet-American relationship by say-
the same time they said the President
ing the Nicaraguans had lied to Mos-
was careful not to try to carve out a
COW about arms shipments to El Salva-
new European map or undertake the
dor.
kind of unilateral, impromptu arms
'Work in Common Cause'
control negotiations that so alarmed
Western Europe when President Rea-
"If you can diminish tensions, there
gan met with Mr. Gorbachev in Reyk-
are a lot of issues in which the United
javik, Iceland, in 1986.
States and Soviet Union can work in
common cause and draw benefit," an
'To Demonstrate Leadership'
American official said. "Soviet behav-
"We're standing here at the seat of
ior has already led to results in some
NATO, and it's clear they perceive that
places that are very much in the inter-
the President of the United States has
est of diminshing conflict."
done what they fundamentally want
On economic issues, Administration
the President of the United States to
officials said Mr. Bush had given Mr.
do: to demonstrate leadership in an in-
Gorbachev two important offers that
ternational environment," a senior of-
he had long sought: American support
for Soviet observer status in the Gen-
eral Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
and a promise to consider lifting Amer-
Showing
ican trade restrictions.
Neither one will cost the United
leadership, but
States money, Administration officials
said. At the same time, they argued,
without angering
the White House stands to gain from
the proposals.
For one thing, Mr. Bush's suggestion
the allies.
satisfies complaints from the Soviet
Union, Western Europe and even back
home that he has not done enough to
capitalize on the economic evolution in
ficial said after Mr. Bush briefed his
Europe. In addition, an American offi-
allies on the Malta meetings.
cial said, the United States believes it is
"They like the President to demon-
encouraging the Soviets "to make ad-
strate a sense of direction," the official
justments that we have been seeking
said. "But they definitely don't like the
for a long time."
President jumping out too far too fast."
Soviet-American economic coopera-
Mr. Bush repeatedly said before
tion will allow the United States to re-
going to Malta that he was determined
main more closely engaged with the
not to become engaged in detailed
Soviets, the Americans argued.
arms control negotiations. But part of
"If through your economic proposals
the credit for avoiding a repetition of
and the institutionalization of a human
the Reykjavik situation must go to Mr.
rights agenda, you can build a more
Gorbachev, who seemed equally aware
pluralistic Soviet Union, that helps
of the new pressures on the superpow-
make the changes in the Soviet Union
ers from their own alliances and did
less easy to reverse," an official said.
not set any tripwires for the Ameican
"It also makes for a more transparent
President.
Soviet Union, so you have a beter sense
Mr. Bush was able to point to Mr.
of whether there are really changes."
Gorbachev's agreement to speed the
Personal Stake for Bush
negotiations on a treaty to reduce
strategic arms and on conventional
There was an intensely personal
stake for Mr. Bush in the Malta sum-
weapons in Europe. But they were both
able to say to their allies that they had
mit. He demonstrates that he was able
not tried to go too far beyond those
to deal with Mr. Gorbachev smoothly
frameworks. The delicacy of this issue
and effectively and try to dispel the no-
seemed apparent in the relative lack of
tion that he was missing opportunities.
emphasis that Mr. Bush and Mr. Gor-
"He took my measure, and I took his,
and we both feel more comfortable
bachev have given to Eastern Europe
in their public statements.
about our common objectives," Mr.
Bush said.
In Defense of NATO
The President retained some of his
Both Mr. Bush and Mr. Gorbachev
characteristic reserve today, declining
were careful to stress that they were
to answer a question about whether,
not calling for the eventual dissolution
like Mr. Gorbachev, he now considers
of the NATO and Warsaw Pact al-
the cold war to be over. "I don't want to
liances. Administration officials said
give you a headline," he said.
before the Malta talks that they were
But he seemed clearly sensitive to
keenly aware that NATO provides the
the criticism that he has been too timid
United States with a foothold in a West-
and lacking in a world vision. Asked
ern Europe that is becoming increas-
why he had insisted on staying aboard
ingly integrated economically.
his warship, the cruiser Belknap, dur-
"The United States must stay in-
ing the summit despite a powerful gale,
volved," Mr. Bush said at a news con-
Mr. Bush replied: "Well, you know
ference here. "What we don't want to
these charismatic, macho, visionary
do is send the signal of decoupling, the
guys. They'll do anything."
Bush summit performance
draws praise from NATO
By Peter Almond
bers said he was impressed by the
future, but turmoil can be very dis-
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
A5
United States' 'extraordinarily posi-
turbing and we don't know what may
tive attitude" toward events in Eu-
happen.
BRUSSELS, Belgium - Ameri-
rope.
"Times of great change are times
ca's European allies yesterday
"It has nothing to do with a 'We are
when we have even greater need for
hailed President Bush's perform-
pulling out' attitude," he told report-
secure and stable alliances."
ance at the summit meeting with So-
ers. "On the contrary, they are again
Mrs. Thatcher raised a point
viet President Mikhail Gorbachev,
promising a meaningful presence
echoed by Dutch and French offi-
lauding Mr. Bush's commitment to
[in Europe]."
cials: that there is still a long way to
Europe and his emphasis on main-
Belgian officials said it was ob-
go before nations in Eastern Europe
taining NATO and the Warsaw Pact.
vious that the president took Europe
and the Soviet Union fully grasp the
The leaders of the 16-nation North
seriously.
Western concepts of impartial law
Atlantic Treaty Organization came
Canadian Prime Minister Brian
and market forces.
together yesterday with concerns
Mulroney said there was no question
"It is easier to demand freedom
that fast-moving events in Eastern
of withdrawing his country's forces
than it is to set the structures of free-
Europe and budget pressures on the
from Europe. NATO provides a secu-
dom in place," she said.
The So-
United States to remove troops from
rity link between the United States
viet [Union] has very little idea how
Europe would make the 40-year-old
and Canada and Western Europe.
to run a market economy."
alliance outmoded.
Mr. Mulroney said NATO was
Significantly, French President
But after hearing Mr. Bush's re-
"more relevant now than ever."
Francois Mitterrand, who does not
port on Mr. Gorbachev, West Ger-
"It offers both security and stabil-
believe NATO is the right forum to
man Chancellor Helmut Kohl's re-
ity," Mrs. Thatcher added.
negotiate with the East, did not make
port on East Germany, and several
Just last week, Defense Secretary
a major contribution to yesterday's
hours of discussion on the situation
Richard Cheney was at NATO head-
discussions.
in Europe and the Soviet Union, the
quarters trying to dispel fears that
Mr. Mitterrand arrived late and
allies emerged expressing no doubts
the United States would unilaterally
returned to Paris immediately after
about the future of NATO.
pull its troops out of Europe because
the meeting without any public com-
"Whatever the nature of the
of budget-deficit pressures and re-
ment. According to French officials,
speeches and whatever the political
duced East-West tensions.
he is due to meet with Mr. Gorba-
content, time after time the need to
What was not dealt with at the
chev tomorrow in the Soviet city of
keep NATO strong and secure came
NATO meetings, however, was ex-
Kiev and be host to an EC meeting
through," British Prime Minister
actly how the West should help East-
Friday in Strasbourg, France.
Margaret Thatcher said of the
ern Europe economically and politi-
Several smaller NATO nations
NATO meeting.
cally. The economic issues are
have fears about what the situation
"The point is that NATO and the
scheduled for discussion at upcom-
Warsaw Pact structures are the
ing talks by the EC; the so-called
in Eastern Europe may do to them.
main way we negotiate arms control
"Group of 24," which includes the
Portugal and Greece, for instance,
and disarmament."
NATO nations, Japan and other
worry that EC funds they need may
Mr. Bush toned down discussion
Western allies; and NATO foreign
now be diverted to Eastern Europe,
of planning for a second round of
ministers.
and officials said they used their
Conventional Forces in Europe
With changes in Eastern Europe
limited opportunities to subtly re-
arms-reduction talks.
occurring from day to day and al-
mind the allies that the status quo is
Mrs. Thatcher, though, appeared
most hour by hour, the allies per-
their best bet to help their still-
to have qualms about some of the
suaded one another it was not the
developing economies.
president's remarks, in which Mr.
time to make fast, bold moves of
The same went for new Turkish
Bush raised the possibility of
their own. Some were even hesitant
Prime Minister Yildirim Akbulut,
greater arms cuts in Europe and
to acknowledge an end to the Cold
whose only major ticket for admis-
even closer ties among the 12 na-
War, despite the fact that newspa-
sion to Europe is its NATO member-
tions of the European Community.
pers from London to Budapest, Hun-
ship. He told the allies he was very
She said Mr. Bush's speech "was
gary, headlined its demise yesterday.
pleased by the outcome of the Bush-
so full of meat that we really should
"Time after time the word 'cau-
Gorbachev summit - and the NATO
consider it very carefully before we
tion' came [at the NATO summit],"
summit - because it stressed the
reply to it."
Mrs. Thatcher said. "Time after
value of the alliance.
Others were not so hesitant.
time security and stability and value
This article is based in part on
Dutch Prime Minister Ruud Lub-
came. Of course we don't know the
wire service reports.
After the Summit: The Climate 'Was Really Good'
Excerpts From Bush's News
Conference After NATO Meeting
the real American role? And two, will there
BRUSSELS, Dec. 4 (AP) - Following are
now be more money for the poor and the
A. some - take some years off of
excerpts from a transcript of President
homeless, public housing? The nation is
that, you can look to a utopian day when there
Bush's news conference today after his meet-
really badly in need of repair of infrastruc-
might not be. But as I pointed out to them,
ing here with leaders of the North Atlantic
ture.
that day hasn't arrived, and they agree with
Treaty Organization:
12-5-89
A. We have a lot of demands at home, and
NYT
Alb
me. And so the United States must stay in-
there's no question about that. But I think it is
volved. What we don't want to do is send the
OPENING STATEMENT
premature to speak, as some are at home,
signal of decoupling, the decoupling of the
about a "peace dividend" - take a lot of
United States and Canada from NATO,
This year, the people of the East made fun-
money out of defense and put it into other
damental choices about their destiny, and
particularly at this highly sensitive time, and
worthy causes.
We are under a tremen-
Mr. Gorbachev understood that.
governments there began to honor the citi-
dous burden to get our total spending down in
zens' right to choose. What these changes
order to meet the Gramm-Rudman and the
amount to is nothing less than a peaceful
revolution. And the task before us, therefore,
Gramm-Rudman targets
Impressions of Gorbachev
is to consolidate the fruits of this peaceful
German Reunification
revolution and provide the architecture for
Q. Mr. President, you had mentioned that
continued peaceful change, to end the divi-
Q. Mr. President, Vernon Walters, your
you got some insight into President Gorba-
sion of Europe and of Germany, to make Eu-
trusted adviser and the Ambassador to Bonn,
chev at this summit. I wonder if the insight
said that he envisions a - said that Germa-
included any sense of his internal position.
rope whole and free.
ny, East and West, will be reunited within
Did he behave as if a man operating from a
five years. Do you think that's possible? And
strong position, a man who seems to be in
Although this is a time of great hope - and
what would be the implications for NATO
jeopardy, or how do you feel about that?
it is - we must not blur the distinction be-
and the Warsaw Pact?
A. I thought he seemed very much in con-
tween promising expectations and present
A. I am not into the predicting of time on
trol. You can tell the way that he interacted
realities. We must remain constant with
the question of Germany.
I think it's bet-
with his own top people there. And he felt
NATO's traditional security mission. I
ter to let things move on their own and with-
very confident in discussing
a
wide
array
pledged today that the United States will
out the United States certainly setting some
of subjects with me
He
seemed
-
"sub-
maintain significant military forces in Eu-
kind of deadline.
dued" is the wrong word, but I would say
"ope as long as our allies desire our presence
determined and unemotional about it. The
as part of a common defense effort. The U.S.
What Bush Learned
most emotion we saw was at that press con-
will remain a European power, and that
ference yesterday, but it was a wonderful
means that the United States will stay en-
Q. Mr. President, you said, in announcing
presentation. And the climate for - leave out
your meeting with Chairman Gorbachev,
gaged in the future of Europe and in our com-
the weather - the climate for the discussions
that one of the main reasons was that you
mon defense.
was really good.
wanted to make sure that, in this time of
Many of the values that should guide Eu-
change, you didn't miss anything. In your two
rope's future are described in the Final Act
Gorbachev's Vlews on Germany
days of meetings, did you learn anything that
of the Conference on Security and Coopera-
you fear, or feel, that you might have missed
Q. Mr. President, again as part of the in-
non in Europe. These values encompass the
had you not had this?
sight you gained, what is your understanding
freedom of people to choose their destiny
A. Yes. What I would have missed is I
about Secretary General Gorbachev's view
under a rule of law with rulers who are demo-
wouldn't see quite as clearly his priorities. I
of the unification of Germany? Do you think
ratically accountable.
see them more clearly because he and I sat
he's as opposed as he's said in public, or do
I think we can look to the C.S.C.E. to play a
down and talked. And I feel I can sense
you think that he accepts the fact that
greater role in the future of Europe. The 35
much more clearly the things he feels more
A. I think his view was one of
caution,
nations of the C.S.C.E. bridge both the divi-
strongly about.
and I really believe that. I think he recog-
sion of Europe and the Atlantic Ocean. It is a
And we had a good chance to point out to
nizes the rapidity of change. He has very con-
structure that should be able to contribute
him some of the difficulties with our relation-
structively talked about "peaceful change,"
much to the future architecture of Europe.
ship. It wasn't all sweetness and light. I had a
and I don't - I think his hope is that people
I also appreciate the vital role that the E.C.
must play in the new Europe. And it is my be-
very - very good opportunity to tell him how
don't try to set up some artificial calendar by
hef that the events of our times call both for a
we view the - our problems in our own hemi-
which - date by which that reunification
continued, perhaps even intensified, effort of
sphere: the sending of arms in there to help
should happen. And I think he feels that, if
the F.M.L.N., and the role that - unhelpful
there were outside forces setting dates on
the 12 to integrate and a role for the E.C. as a
magnet that draws the forces of reform to-
role - that Cuba is playing. I recited in detail
something like that, that would complicate
the Oscar Arias phone call to me: "Please
the way in which he is managing the change
ward Eastern Europe.
raise with Mr. Gorbachev the unhelpful role,
and helping manage the change in the Pact.
the destructive role of Cuba.'
The people of Europe, especially the brave
And I think he was pleased, because I think
from his standpoint and this is important
Troop Reductions
citizens of the East, are illuminating the fu-
ture, and yet the outcome is not predestined.
from mine - he now sees that we want to
Q. Mr. President, there was a lot of specu-
It depends on our continued strength and our
have a cooperative, forward-leaning relation-
lation going in that you and Mr. Gorbachev
solidarity as an alliance.
ship with the Soviet Union.
might get involved in talking about deeper
cuts, particularly in European forces. Did
you, in fact, do that? And is there skepticism
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
'Decoupling' the NATO Link
within this organization here about moving
too rapidly beyond what has now. been
Q.
After World War II, the Europeans
dubbed C.F.E. 1?
The 'Peace Dividend'
needed our money for the Marshall Plan.
A. No, we didn't get into that. We talked
Then they needed our military backing be-:
very broadly about our aspirations for fur-
Q. Mr. President, I have a two-part ques-
cause of the Soviet threat. But now
what
non. You have made it clear that you are
ther arms control, but there was no emphasis
are they going to need from us? What role do
going stay in Europe. But in view of the dra-
on that. And I - there may be some strains in
matic reduction in tensions and the obvious
we really have to play here? We don't live on
one country or another viewing the rapidity
this continent.
weakening of the Warsaw Pact, what will be
of change differently than we do. But what I
suggested to our NATO allies is let's go for-
A. You mean would - why will there al-
ward with the agreements we've got out
ways have to be a U.S. presence?
there. The C.F.E., let's get it done.
ON BUDGET PRIORITIES
Q. Why will there always have to be a
I, the President of the United States, will
NATO?
kick our bureaucracy and push it as fast as I
"I think it is premature to
A. Well, I'm not sure - I'm - if you want
possibly we can.
I'm convinced that we
to project out 100 years
I must do more to keep it on schedule. And
speak, as some are at home,
Q. Well, no.
I've encouraged the other allies to do the
about a 'peace dividend.'
same. I don't think there was any resistance
to that. Similarly, Start and chemical weap-
ons.
So before we go into a wide array of other
A. Well, I can see an economic interaction.
questions, I think the best thing to do is take
A.
We have a big difference on how we
And I hope that NATO will, along with the
advantage of the moment and move forward
look at Central America. And I would like to
E.C. and along with O.E.C.D. and these other
in those three areas. And I - we went - I
see him use his influence with Mr. Castro,
areas, will take more of an active East-West
went over that in little talks with individuals
and if he's got any left, with Mr. Ortega, to fa-
role in the economy, in helping each other in
from NATO, as well as in the meeting itself.
cilitate democratic change in the Western
terms of systems. But he did not press that
Hemisphere. So when you get into a sub-
point with me at all. I think he envisions an
Q. But do you accept the principle of a
ject like that, where he may have a different
active U.S. presence in Europe, in one way or
C.F.E. 2?
formula, it's a little more concentrated than
another
A. Well, I'd like to get a C.F.E. 1 in the bank
when you're clicking off agreements in some
first, get it locked up, get those troops out,
areas.
High-Seas Machismo
-
move down to equal levels - U.S. and Soviet
Q. Mr. President, after five hours of talks
forces. And so we ought to - we ought to
More Swords and Plowshares
on Saturday, despite extremely treacherous
manage that before we start the architect.
Q. Mr. President, you stepped aside on a
seas, and you even had trouble getting to the
of something else. I want to see that done on
question about the "peace dividend" and said
talks, you got back in your launch and went
time
that you've got a terrible Gramm-Rudman
problem next year. As you look at the
East German Instability
changes in Europe and the possibilities of
ON THE COLD WAR
further defense cuts, do you expect any time
Q. Mr. President, on East Germany, as you
in your first term to have a dividend, a
know, the party structure, the Communist
"peace dividend" to apply to some of the eco-
"If I signal to you there's no
Party structure has collapsed there. It's un-
nomic and social problems at home? And
cold war, then you say,
clear who's running the Government. I won-
when would you expect that?
der if you talked about that, if you personally
A. That's an awful tough question to an-
'Well, what are you doing
think that it's a dangerous situation, if that
swer about any time. I would think it would
with troops in Europe?' I
moves unification up in the timetable at all?
be extraordinarily difficult because of the -
mean, come on!"
And secondly, what Gorbachev said to you
of the - not only the enormity of the Gramm-
when you said to him, unification of Germany
Rudman - the difficulty of reaching the
would have to be in the NATO context?
Gramm-Rudman target this year, but what
A. No, I don't think it's a dangerous situa-
follows on. There just isn't a lot of quote
tion. I don't think anybody here in this room,
back to your ship. Mr. President, why did you
excess money unquote floating around there.
do that? And——
including myself, has been able to predict the
Q. Not for the foreseeable future, not for
rapidity of the change, the totality of the
A. Because I wanted to go back in time to
the rest of your first term?
receive him for dinner.
change. But I don't see it as dangerous, as
A. Well, look at the Gramm-Rudman tar-
long as the Soviet leader and the Germans
gets that face us. I don't want to hold out to
Q. Didn't you understand you were risking
and the West conduct themselves the way
the summit, number one? And number two.
those that want to rush out and spend a lot
I've been - been urging.
more money the hope that that is going to
judgment? what do you think Gorbachev thinks of your
What was the second part?
happen. We've got some tremendous eco-
Q. Well, what Mr. Gorabachev said to you
A. Maureen, you've been to Maine. Don't
nomic problems that have to be solved. Be-
when you said unification, but only in the
tell me that that little chop was - was risk-
cause the best answer to helping people
is
NATO context? I mean, he keeps saying it
ing anything. Frankly, I haven't had that
to have a job. And the best way to have the
has to be in the Warsaw Pact context.
much fun in a long time But we didn't
A. No, we - we - we were - I don't think
miss a beat. In fact, we had a very relaxed
we went into that in real depth, Lesley.
evening out there, and then showed up and we
Q. Well, what do you think he thinks about
ON BRAVING THE SEAS
got eight hours of talks in. I didn't
it? I mean, obviously
there was any risk in getting into a little safe
A. Well, that's too hypothetical. I got trou-
"Hot-dogging? No. Well, you
launch like that and going back out to the
ble figuring it out on our side with all our ex-
know, these charismatic,
ship. It was sheer pleasure, really.
perts, rather than knowing what I think he
Q. And it was hot-dogging?
might think about something he hasn't
macho, visionary guys -
A. Hot-dogging? No. Well, you know, these
thought about maybe
they'll do anything."
charismatic, macho, visionary guys - they'll
do anything.
Bush's New View of Gorbachev
Nicaragua
Q. Mr. President - Mr. President, you
seem to have traveled some distance be-
climate for a job is to have a sound economy.
Q. Mr. President, a few moments ago, you
tween what you were saying about Mr. Gor-
And to our foreign friends here, I'd say one of
questioned whether Gorbachev had any influ-
bachev a year or so ago and some of the
the things that would be the best guarantee of
ence at all over Daniel Ortega. Yet in his
things you said yesterday. Could you please
that would be to get our Federal deficits
news conference yesterday, Chairman Gor-
talk in a little bit more detail about the evolu-
down. It would also help us with investment.
bachev indicated that there may be an oppor-
tion in your thinking that you mentioned yes-
I had a letter from a distinguished senator
tunity now for peace in the region. Did he in-
terday, how that happened and what per-
before I left, because he had read about possi-
dicate to you in any way whether, one, he had
suaded you along the way?
ble defense cuts, a reduction in the defense
any control over Ortega, or, two, whether
A. As I watched the way in which Mr. Gor-
budget, saying take that money and spend it
there was something in the works that may
bachev has handled the changes in Eastern
for a cause that he felt was very worthy. And
lead to some kind of peaceful political
Europe, it deserves new thinking. It abso-
I had to write him back and say, "Look, that
A. No, he didn't, but I think - he didn't indi-
lutely mandates new thinking. And when- I
isn't the way it's going to work." That isn't
cate whether he had any control over him.
see his willingness to give support to a C.F.E.
the way it's going to work.
What he did indicate was that there were
agreement that calls for him to dispropor-
going to be free elections. And I told him,
Q. Chairman Gorbachev said yesterday
that's fine to have those free elections, but
that you and he agreed in your talks that the
they've got to be fair. You have to have ac-
ON GORBACHEV
world - that the Malta meeting marked the
cess from - for the minorities to - minority
end of the epoch of the Cold War and entering
parties and the opposition party, the UNO. to
"I feel I can sense much
a new period. Do you agree with him that the
get in there and participate, a full access.
Cold War is over?
And so we had a little discussion of that. But
that was about it.
more clearly the things he
A. Carl, let me tell you something. We're
fooling with semantics here. I don't want to
Q. To follow up, if he indicated there would
feels more strongly about.'
give you a headline. I've told you the areas
be free elections, that in turn would indicate
where I think we have progress. Why do we
that he does in fact maintain some sort of in-
resort to these code words that send different
fluence on Ortega. And then wouldn't you
tionately reduce his forces, and that is there
signals to different people? I'm not going to
hold him further responsible to stop that flow
of arms in El Salvador?
on the table, I think that mandates new think-
answer. I
ing. When I hear him talk about peaceful
Q. (Inaudible)
A. Well, I'm not sure that - I don't see
change and the right of countries to choose -
A. Well, good. He can speak for himself
quite the logic, that if he says there's going to
countries in the Warsaw Pact to choose -
be a free election that means he controls
that deserves new thinking.
them. I'm unclear on your
very - in a very eloquent way. But in terms
And so I approach this, and I think, in step
of if you want me to define it - is the Cold
Q. How could he - how could he assure you
with our allies, with a certain respect for
that there would be free elections?
what he's doing, and thus we want to try to
War the same - I mean, is it raging like it
A. I don't - oh, excuse me - I don't think
was before in the times of the Berlin Block-
meet him on some of the areas where he
he assured me there was. He just says free
ade? Absolutely not. Things have moved
needs help. I'm thinking of a few suggestions
elections are scheduled. And I told him how
dramatically. But if I signal to you there's no
I had in the economic area. But I also believe
Cold War, then you'll say, "Well, what are
important we felt it was that they go forward.
that the West must remain strong and to-
you doing with troops in Europe?" I mean,
gether and try to be helpful where we can in a
come on!
I think he was impressed - I may be
united way, but not be imprudent
Q. Mr. President, what is your reaction to
wrong, but I - I think he was impressed by
The Moments of Tension
Chairman Gorbachev's proposal that NATO
the message from Oscar Arias. And I asked
and the Warsaw Pact should not remain yet
Arias if it was O.K. to tell him of the call, and
Q. Mr. President, you mentioned earlier
military alliances, but rather become mili-
he said, "Yes, I hope you will." So when I said
that there was some tension during the meet-
tary-political alliances, and later on just
this man, this Nobel Prize winner - prize
ings and earlier, to reporters you had said
political alliances? Can you envisage in the
winner down there - who - with whom
that there was no personal rancor. Could you
future any form of cooperation between the
we've had some differences, though normally
outline the moments of tension or tell us a lit-
two alliances?
we're in pretty good sync - appeals to you,
tle bit about the moments when you felt there
"Use your influence to, you know, stop the ex-
was tension between you and the Soviet lead-
port of revolution," it may have made an im-
er?
pact.
Maita info
for your
files.
Class
al.
FYI
ARRIVAL STATEMENT IN BRUSSELS, 12/3/89
D1
Today, we met in Malta, Winston Churchill's "tiny rock of
history and romance." Ancient stepping stone to Europe. Today,
the crossroads of East and West.
And tonight we meet in Brussels. Tonight we stand at the
crossroads of history, on our way to a Europe whole and free.
It is a always a pleasure to return to Brussels. This city
represents the finest that Europe has to offer in friendship and
hospitality. It also represents the strength and vitality of
European institutions, nourished and protected for more than 40
years by the security shield of NATO -- one of the great success
stories of our century.
Brussels symbolizes a vibrant and growing trans-Atlantic
partnership -- one that has helped foster the astounding changes
we are seeing today.
The modern Atlantic Alliance was born at sea. It was on a
battleship off the coast of Canada that Franklin Roosevelt met
Winston Churchill during Europe's darkest hour, great leaders in
a rendezvous at sea, a rendezvous with destiny.
The legacy of that meeting became known as the Atlantic
Charter, significant not for its details, but for its vision.
It spoke of a day when all peoples, in all nations, would
freely choose their form of government, and live lives rich with
opportunity and hope. It spoke of a day when nations would
resolve their differences at the negotiating table, not on the
field of battle.
Tonight, I have come to Brussels to share with our friends
and allies the results of that vision -- results born of strength
and solidarity, continuity and commitment.
It seems like the world is changing overnight. But the
yearning for freedom lives within all of us, and always has.
That simple truth is manifested in the thunderous events taking
place a few hundred kilometers to the East. And that simple
truth brought Mikhail Gorbachev and I together in a windswept
harbor off Malta.
The seas were as turbulent as our times. But it was not an
ill wind carrying us on our mission. No, it was the winds of
change. Strong and constant. Profound.
And today, as the sun broke through the clouds, we could
both see a new world taking shape -- a new world of freedom.
Here in Brussels, only six months ago, we pledged as Allies
to work together to end the division of Europe. We now stand at
the threshold of making that dream a reality.
My presence here, and that of my NATO colleagues,
underscores the importance we attach to consultations within the
Alliance. I look forward to my discussions with Prime Minister
Martens, Secretary-General Woerner, and E.C. Commission President
DeLors.
It is an exciting time for the Alliance, for Europe, and for
America. I have come with good news. Thank you, God bless you,
and good night.
Churlet
PRESIDENT'S AFTERNOON INTERVENTION
FYI
ON THE FUTURE OF EUROPE
INTRODUCTION
THIS MORNING I REVIEWED MY DISCUSSIONS WITH PRESIDENT
GORBACHEV AT MALTA AND WE HEARD FROM PRIME MINISTER
ANDREOTTI AND PRIME MINISTER MULRONEY ABOUT THEIR RECENT
MEETINGS WITH HIM.
I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY THIS AFTERNOON TO TALK
ABOUT A SUBJECT OF EVEN BROADER SCOPE: THE FUTURE SHAPE OF
THE NEW EUROPE AND THE NEW ATLANTICISM.
A TIME OF CHOICE
WHEN WE LAST MET IN MAY, OUR SUMMIT DECLARATION DESCRIBED
THE SETTING AS A "JUNCTURE OF UNPRECEDENTED CHANGE AND
OPPORTUNITIES." IN THE LAST SIX MONTHS, WE HAVE WITNESSED
EVENTS THAT HAVE FINALLY BEGUN TO MATCH OUR HOPES THESE
FORTY YEARS. OUR DREAMS FOR AN HISTORIC TRANSFORMATION OF
EUROPE FROM A DIVIDED CONTINENT INTO A CONTINENT WHOLE AND
FREE ARE COMING TRUE.
THE ALLIANCE WAS ESTABLISHED IN 1949 TO PROVIDE THE BASIS
FOR PRECISELY THE EXTRAORDINARY EVOLUTION WHICH IS OCCURRING
IN EASTERN EUROPE TODAY.
THIS YEAR THE PEOPLE OF THE EAST MADE FUNDAMENTAL CHOICES
ABOUT THEIR DESTINY, AND GOVERNMENTS THERE BEGAN TO HONOR
THE CITIZEN'S RIGHT TO CHOOSE. WHAT THESE CHANGES AMOUNT TO
IS NOTHING LESS THAN A PEACEFUL REVOLUTION.
THE TASK BEFORE US IS TO CONSOLIDATE THE FRUITS OF THIS
PEACEFUL REVOLUTION AND PROVIDE THE ARCHITECTURE FOR
CONTINUED PEACEFUL CHANGE. GREAT CHOICES ARE BEING MADE,
AND GREATER OPPORTUNITIES BECKON.
THE FIRST PRINCIPLE FOR EUROPE'S FUTURE: OVERCOMING THE DIVISION
OF EUROPE THROUGH FREEDOM
IN ANY TIME OF GREAT CHANGE, IT IS GOOD TO HAVE FIRM
PRINCIPLES TO GUIDE OUR WAY. OUR GOVERNMENTS COMMITTED
THEMSELVES AGAIN IN MAY TO SEEK AN END TO THE PAINFUL
DIVISION OF EUROPE. WE HAVE NEVER ACCEPTED THIS DIVISION.
THE PEOPLE OF EVERY NATION HAVE THE RIGHT TO DETERMINE THEIR
OWN WAY OF LIFE IN FREEDOM.
OF COURSE, WE HAVE ALL SUPPORTED GERMAN REUNIFICATION FOR
FOUR DECADES. AND IN OUR VIEW, THIS GOAL OF GERMAN
UNIFICATION SHOULD BE BASED ON THE FOLLOWING PRINCIPLES.
FIRST, SELF-DETERMINATION MUST BE PURSUED WITHOUT PREJUDICE
TO ITS OUTCOME. WE SHOULD NOT AT THIS TIME ENDORSE NOR
EXCLUDE ANY PARTICULAR VISION OF UNITY.
2
SECOND, UNIFICATION SHOULD OCCUR IN THE CONTEXT OF GERMANY'S
CONTINUED COMMITMENT TO NATO AND AN INCREASINGLY INTEGRATED
EUROPEAN COMMUNITY, AND WITH DUE REGARD FOR THE LEGAL ROLE
AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE ALLIED POWERS.
THIRD, IN THE INTERESTS OF GENERAL EUROPEAN STABILITY, MOVES
TOWARD UNIFICATION MUST BE PEACEFUL, GRADUAL, AND PART OF A
STEP-BY-STEP PROCESS.
LASTLY, ON THE QUESTION OF BORDERS WE SHOULD REITERATE OUR
SUPPORT FOR THE PRINCIPLES OF THE HELSINKI FINAL ACT.
AN END TO THE UNNATURAL DIVISION OF EUROPE, AND OF GERMANY,
MUST PROCEED IN ACCORDANCE WITH AND BE BASED UPON THE VALUES
THAT ARE BECOMING UNIVERSAL IDEALS, AS ALL THE COUNTRIES OF
EUROPE BECOME PART OF A COMMONWEALTH OF FREE NATIONS. I
KNOW MY FRIEND HELMUT KOHL COMPLETELY SHARES THIS
CONVICTION.
THE ROLE OF NATO
--
THE POLITICAL STRATEGY FOR NATO THAT WE AGREED UPON LAST MAY
MAKES THE PROMOTION OF GREATER FREEDOM IN THE EAST A BASIC
ELEMENT OF ALLIANCE POLICY. ACCORDINGLY, NATO SHOULD
PROMOTE HUMAN RIGHTS, DEMOCRACY, AND REFORM WITHIN EASTERN
COUNTRIES AS THE BEST MEANS OF ENCOURAGING RECONCILIATION
AMONG THE COUNTRIES OF EASTERN AND WESTERN EUROPE.
THIS EFFORT RECALLS THE ORIGIN OF NATO AS A POLITICAL
ALLIANCE OF NATIONS SHARING THE SAME FUNDAMENTAL VALUES, A
FOUNDATION ON WHICH I EXPECT NATO WILL INCREASINGLY BUILD IN
THIS NEW AGE OF EUROPE.
ALLIANCE SUPPORT FOR REFORM AND POSITIVE CHANGE IN THE EAST
NEEDS TO BE BROAD, MULTIFACETED, AND FLEXIBLE. IT SHOULD
NOT ONLY BE A QUESTION OF ECONOMIC ASSISTANCE -- AS
IMPORTANT AS THAT MIGHT BE -- BUT OF STEPS TO SUPPORT
GREATER POLITICAL PLURALISM, OPEN UP FLOWS OF INFORMATION,
DEVELOP NEEDED TECHNICAL EXPERTISE, AND PROVIDE THROUGH OUR
DEFENSE AND ARMS CONTROL EFFORTS A STABLE SECURITY
ENVIRONMENT FOR INDIVIDUAL EUROPEAN STATES, BOTH EAST AND
WEST.
THIS FITS THE CONCEPT OF "NEW MISSIONS FOR NATO" WHICH I
PROPOSED WHEN I WAS HERE LAST MAY FOR OUR SUMMIT.
BUT WE ALSO MUST REMAIN CONSTANT WITH NATO'S TRADITIONAL
SECURITY MISSION. THE POTENTIAL FOR STRIFE IS INHERENT IN
ANY PERIOD OF FUNDAMENTAL POLITICAL TRANSITION. IN SEEKING
AND PREPARING PEACEFUL CHANGE, THIS ALLIANCE ALSO MUST
REMAIN A RELIABLE GUARANTOR OF PEACE IN EUROPE, AS IT HAS
BEEN FOR FORTY YEARS. IT UNITES THE FREE STATES OF THE
ATLANTIC COMMUNITY IN SHARING RISKS AND RESPONSIBILITIES AS
WE WORK TOGETHER TO NURTURE AND GUIDE THE DEVELOPMENT OF A
NEW EUROPE.
3
AS A DEFENSIVE ALLIANCE AND PARTNERSHIP OF DEMOCRACIES, NATO
SHOULD NOT BE SEEN AS THREATENING BY THE EAST. RATHER, IT
CAN HELP MANAGE PEACEFUL CHANGE IN EUROPE IN A WAY THAT
PRESERVES SECURITY AND STABILITY FOR ALL STATES. A HEALTHY
NATO WILL SUPPORT BOTH MOVES TOWARD GREATER UNITY WITHIN
WESTERN EUROPE AS WELL AS THE DISSOLUTION OF BARRIERS WITH
THE EAST.
ALTHOUGH THIS IS A TIME OF GREAT HOPE, WE MUST NOT BLUR THE
DISTINCTION BETWEEN PROMISING EXPECTATIONS AND PRESENT
REALITIES.
MY GOVERNMENT THEREFORE REMAINS COMMITTED TO THE ALLIANCE
STRATEGY FOR THE PREVENTION OF WAR, BASED ON A MIX OF
NUCLEAR AND CONVENTIONAL FORCES.
I PLEDGE TODAY THAT THE UNITED STATES WILL MAINTAIN
SIGNIFICANT MILITARY FORCES IN EUROPE AS LONG AS OUR ALLIES
DESIRE OUR PRESENCE AS PART OF A COMMON SECURITY EFFORT.
AS I SAID AT NATO EARLIER THIS YEAR, THE U.S. WILL REMAIN A
EUROPEAN POWER. THAT MEANS THE U.S. WILL STAY ENGAGED IN
THE FUTURE OF EUROPE, AND IN OUR COMMON DEFENSE.
THIS IS NOT OLD THINKING. IT IS GOOD THINKING. OF COURSE I
WOULD LIKE TO SEE A LESS MILITARIZED EUROPE. EVERYONE HERE
KNOWS HOW STRONGLY I SUPPORT THE PROGRESS BEING MADE IN THE
NEGOTIATIONS ON CONVENTIONAL FORCES IN EUROPE TOWARD AN
AGREEMENT THAT WOULD REDUCE THE SIZE OF THE CONVENTIONAL
FORCES ON BOTH SIDES OF THE EAST-WEST DIVIDE.
THIS CFE AGREEMENT WOULD DRAMATICALLY CUT BACK WARSAW PACT,
PARTICULARLY SOVIET, FORCE STRENGTH. THIS HAS GREAT
IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROCESS OF REFORM IN EASTERN EUROPE AS
WELL AS FOR THE SECURITY OF WESTERN EUROPE. AND IT WOULD
PROVIDE FOR A CAREFULLY MANAGED AND RESPONSIBLE SET OF
ALLIED REDUCTIONS AS WELL.
AS WE SEEK TO ADJUST OUR MILITARY POSTURE TO THE CHANGING
POLITICAL CLIMATE, I CAN THINK OF NO BETTER MODEL THAN THE
CFE PROCESS AS A WAY TO COORDINATE OUR RESPONSES TO THE NEW
REQUIREMENTS OF EUROPEAN SECURITY. WE MUST STAND TOGETHER
FOR NEGOTIATED, COORDINATED, STABILIZING REDUCTIONS AGAINST
A RUSH TO THROW OFF DEFENSE BURDENS, AGAINST A RETURN TO THE
NARROW PROTECTION OF SELF-INTEREST THAT COULD BE so
DANGEROUS AT A TIME WHEN EUROPEAN POLITICS ARE IN A STATE OF
FLUX RIVALED IN MY ADULT LIFE ONLY BY THE IMMEDIATE
AFTERMATH OF THE SECOND WORLD WAR.
YET, THE CFE PROCESS HAS NOT REALIZED ITS FULL POTENTIAL.
LAST MAY WE AGREED TO SEEK AN AGREEMENT WITHIN ONE YEAR. WE
HAVE MADE GOOD PROGRESS SINCE THEN, BUT TOO LITTLE AND TOO
SLOWLY TO TAKE FULL ADVANTAGE OF THE OPPORTUNITY BEFORE US:
THE CHANCE TO EASE THE SOVIET ARMY OUT OF EASTERN EUROPE AND
SUBSTANTIALLY REDUCE THE RISK OF SURPRISE ATTACK AND
AGGRESSION.
4
WE AS POLITICAL LEADERS NEED TO REMAIN FIXED ON THIS GOAL
AND TO RE-ENERGIZE OUR BUREAUCRACIES AND NEGOTIATORS TO
SEIZE THIS URGENT OPPORTUNITY. I HOPE YOU AGREE WITH ME ON
THE NEED FOR ACTION NOW. IF WE IN THIS ALLIANCE ARE NOT
EQUAL TO THE CHANGES THAT ARE GOING ON IN EUROPE AROUND US,
THE CFE PROCESS COULD BE OVERRUN BY EVENTS. THAT COULD BE
DANGEROUS AND WE MUST AVOID IT.
SIMILARLY, WE NEED TO GIVE THOUGHT TO HOW THE ALLIANCE CAN
BEST MAINTAIN, IN THE MIDST OF CHANGE, DETERRENCE AT THE
LOWEST POSSIBLE LEVEL OF FORCES.
FOR THAT REASON, I AM PREPARED TO LOOK WITH AN OPEN MIND AT
WAYS IN WHICH WE CAN TOGETHER ACHIEVE EVEN LOWER LEVELS OF
CONVENTIONAL AND NUCLEAR FORCES IN EUROPE AS PART OF A
NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT.
THE ROLE OF CSCE
MANY OF THE VALUES THAT SHOULD GUIDE EUROPE'S FUTURE ARE
DESCRIBED IN THE FINAL ACT OF THE CONFERENCE OF SECURITY AND
COOPERATION IN EUROPE. THESE VALUES ENCOMPASS THE FREEDOM
OF PEOPLE TO CHOOSE THEIR DESTINY UNDER A RULE OF LAW WITH
RULERS WHO ARE DEMOCRATICALLY ACCOUNTABLE.
I THINK WE CAN LOOK TO THE CSCE TO PLAY A GREATER ROLE IN
THE FUTURE OF EUROPE.
EARLIER THIS YEAR, I SUGGESTED WE EXPAND THE CSCE HUMAN
RIGHTS BASKET TO INCLUDE FREE ELECTIONS. GIVEN THE CALLS
AND COMMITMENTS TO ELECTIONS IN MANY NATIONS TO THE EAST,
THIS COULD BE AN EXCELLENT TIME FOR THE CSCE TO ASSUME THIS
ADDITIONAL MANDATE.
IN ADDITION, THE "ECONOMIC BASKET" OF THE CSCE HAS BEEN
UNDERDEVELOPED. I SUGGESTED TO CHAIRMAN GORBACHEV THIS
WEEKEND THAT WE COULD BREATHE NEW LIFE INTO THIS ASPECT OF
CSCE BY FOCUSING ON THE PRACTICAL QUESTIONS INVOLVED IN THE
TRANSITION FROM STAGNANT PLANNED ECONOMIES TO FREE AND
COMPETITIVE MARKETS.
IN SUM, THE THIRTY-FIVE NATIONS OF THE CSCE BRIDGE BOTH THE
DIVISION OF EUROPE AND THE ATLANTIC OCEAN. IT IS A
STRUCTURE THAT SHOULD BE ABLE TO CONTRIBUTE MUCH TO THE
FUTURE ARCHITECTURE OF EUROPE.
THE ROLE OF THE EC
I ALSO APPRECIATE THE VITAL ROLE THE EC MUST PLAY IN THE NEW
EUROPE.
BEFORE MY TRIP TO MALTA, PRESIDENT MITTERRAND CALLED TO
SHARE WITH ME THE VIEWS ABOUT RECENT EVENTS EXPRESSED AT THE
EC MEETING HE HAD CALLED. AND I KNOW THE COMMUNITY WILL BE
RETURNING TO THESE TOPICS IN STRASBOURG LATER THIS WEEK.
5
IT'S MY BELIEF THAT THE EVENTS OF OUR TIMES CALL BOTH FOR A
CONTINUED, PERHAPS EVEN INTENSIFIED, EFFORT OF THE TWELVE TO
INTEGRATE, AND A ROLE FOR THE EC AS A MAGNET THAT DRAWS THE
FORCES OF REFORM FORWARD IN EASTERN EUROPE.
THAT'S WHY I WAS EXCEPTIONALLY PLEASED THAT WE AGREED AT THE
PARIS ECONOMIC SUMMIT ON A SPECIFIC ROLE FOR THE EC IN THE
GROUP OF 24 EFFORT TO ASSIST POLAND AND HUNGARY. NOW THE G-
24, CATALYZED BY EC EFFORTS, MUST DELIVER. ONE KEY STEP IS
TO HELP POLAND ASSEMBLE THE $1 BILLION STABILIZATION FUND IT
HAS REQUESTED TO SUPPORT THE MAJOR MACROECONOMIC OVERHAUL
PLAN IT INTENDS TO PUT IN PLACE WITHIN WEEKS.
I RECOGNIZE, OF COURSE, THAT THE EC CANNOT BEAR THIS BURDEN
ALONE. THE UNITED STATES WILL BE AT THE COMMUNITY'S SIDE IN
THIS NOBLE ENDEAVOR.
I ALSO AM COMMITTED TO A CLOSE U.S. PARTNERSHIP WITH THE EC.
WE ARE BOUND TOGETHER BY COMMON VALUES AND DEMOCRATIC
INSTITUTIONS AS WELL AS BY SHARED INTERESTS. so WE SHOULD
LOOK FOR WAYS TO IMPROVE OUR TIES SO A NEW ATLANTICISM WILL
PULL IN HARNESS WITH A NEW EUROPE.
CONCLUSION
WE STAND ON THE THRESHOLD OF A NEW ERA. WE KNOW THAT WE ARE
CONTRIBUTING TO A PROCESS OF HISTORY DRIVEN BY PEOPLES
DETERMINED TO BE FREE. THE PEOPLE OF EUROPE, ESPECIALLY THE
BRAVE CITIZENS OF THE EAST, ARE ILLUMINATING THE FUTURE.
YET THE OUTCOME IS NOT PREDESTINED. IT DEPENDS ON OUR
CONTINUED STRENGTH AND SOLIDARITY AS AN ALLIANCE. IT
DEPENDS VITALLY ON THE ACTIONS WE TAKE, AS GOVERNMENTS AND
INDIVIDUALS, TO OFFER LEADERSHIP, PROTECTION, AND
ENCOURAGEMENT FOR THIS PROCESS OF PEACEFUL TRANSFORMATION.
EUROPE IS CHANGING, AND WE WILL BE EQUAL TO THE CHANGE. OUR
TRANSATLANTIC PARTNERSHIP CAN CREATE THE ARCHITECTURE OF A
NEW EUROPE, AND A NEW ATLANTICISM, WHERE SELF-DETERMINATION,
AND INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM EVERYWHERE REPLACE COERCION AND
TYRANNY, WHERE ECONOMIC LIBERTY EVERYWHERE REPLACES ECONOMIC
CONTROLS AND STAGNATION, AND WHERE LASTING PEACE IS
REINFORCED EVERYWHERE BY COMMON RESPECT FOR THE RIGHTS OF
MAN.
Cleuss et of
FYI
ARRIVAL STATEMENT: ANDREWS AFB 12/4/89 DD
Thank you. Thank you for that warm greeting on such a brisk
evening. It's great to be home. Back in the U.S.A.
Our mission to Malta, and then Brussels, was about peace.
Not the kind of peace we've known for the last forty years - hard
and cold - but about a new kind of peace. One that is rich with
the promise of permanence. One that is a growing foundation for
freedom.
That was the message I brought to President Gorbachev - a
message that reflects the hopes and aspirations of all Americans.
Many Americans watched on television as the winds of the
Mediterranean tossed our ships about. And I think it's just now
that some of the staff are getting back their appetite.
But as I said in Brussels, it was not an ill wind that
brought Mikhail Gorbachev and me together at Malta. It was the
winds of change. Dramatic change. Witnessed by a world
captivated, awed, by the tumultuous events of 1989.
At Malta, President Gorbachev and I took our first hopeful
step into a new American - Soviet relationship. We took our
first step into the next decade and the new world that is taking
shape - a new world of freedom.
The promise of this new world would not have been possible
without the steadfast support of the American people. It would
not have been possible without the heroes of the East: people
like Lech Walesa, Alexander Dubcek, Sakharov and Solzhenitsyn,
and so many, many more. And, it would not have been possible
without the strength and stability of one of this century's
greatest successes: the NATO Alliance.
[ At Malta, we made much progress. We accelerated the
timetables for reducing arms. We agreed to meet again in June in
the United States. We agreed to press forward on building a
closer economic relationship. We agreed to be pals. ]
You know, during World War II, Winston Churchill called the
island of Malta "democracy's fortress." It withstood one attack
after another, never succumbing to the terrible tyranny of the
Axis assault. En route home from the Teheran Conference in 1943,
Franklin Roosevelt stopped there to deliver the thanks of the
American people, praising Malta as "one tiny, bright flame in the
darkness, a beacon of hope for clearer days."
I thought of that quote as the skies cleared on our second
day of talks. The flame of freedom is casting its glow in many a
dark corner around the world. And ladies and gentlemen, tonight
new beacons of hope are shining brightly: in Warsaw, in Prague,
in Budapest and Berlin, and, I believe, in Moscow.
And America, as always, will be at the forefront of these
extraordinary times.
Thank you for your warm greeting on this winter's night.
God bless you this Christmas season. And God bless the United
States of America.
Class etal
FYI
TALKING POINTS: TRI-MISSION GREETING, BRUSSELS 12/4/89
*
Members of the Brussels family, Ambassador Glitman, Ambassador
Taft, Ambassador Niles (Taft and Niles are new since your
previous visit)
* It's nice to see some familiar faces. When I was in Brussels
six months ago, you would have thought I'd at least wait a year
before I put you through a Presidential visit again.
* But, you know, that is one of the nice things about our crew
here in Brussels: you're ready for anything. You know the drill,
and you're pros.
* Because in these exciting times we need people like you:
unflappable, quick to respond, dedicated veterans of the foreign
policy process.
* The other thing I like about the operation here in Brussels is
your ability to work together. The Joint Administrative Service
support group typifies that kind of effort. And believe me, I
know what a visit like this demands of your admin offices.
Where's Nick Basky? Nick, it's professionals like you that make
these trips bearable. (Nick was also brought in to help out on
the Costa Rica trip)
* It's an exciting time for America. And particularly for you
here in Brussels. You've all seen the reports out of Malta, and
our meeting here with our partners in the Alliance. We are
standing on the threshold of a new era in our relationships with
the East, and you here are on the cutting edge.
(Here, you may want to give them a personal anecdote or
reflection about President Gorbachev or your meeting)
* Thank you for your commitment and your dedication. God bless
you and God bless the United States of America.
* MEMBERS OF THE BRUSSELS FAMILY, AMBASSADOR GLITMAN, AMBASSADOR
TAFT, AMBASSADOR NILES (TAFT AND NILES ARE NEW SINCE YOUR
PREVIOUS VISIT)
* IT'S NICE TO SEE SOME FAMILIAR FACES. WHEN I WAS IN BRUSSELS
SIX MONTHS AGO, YOU WOULD HAVE THOUGHT I'D AT LEAST WAIT A YEAR
BEFORE I PUT YOU THROUGH A PRESIDENTIAL VISIT AGAIN.
* BUT, YOU KNOW, THAT IS ONE OF THE NICE THINGS ABOUT OUR CREW
HERE IN BRUSSELS: YOU'RE READY FOR ANYTHING. YOU KNOW THE
DRILL, AND YOU'RE PROS.
* BECAUSE IN THESE EXCITING TIMES WE NEED PEOPLE LIKE YOU:
UNFLAPPABLE, QUICK TO RESPOND, DEDICATED VETERANS OF THE
FOREIGN POLICY PROCESS.
-1-
*
THE OTHER THING I LIKE ABOUT THE OPERATION HERE IN BRUSSELS
IS YOUR ABILITY TO WORK TOGETHER. THE JOINT ADMINISTRATIVE
SERVICE SUPPORT GROUP TYPIFIES THAT KIND OF EFFORT. AND
BELIEVE ME, I KNOW WHAT A VISIT LIKE THIS DEMANDS OF YOUR
ADMIN OFFICES. WHERE'S NICK BASKY? NICK, IT'S PROFESSIONALS
LIKE YOU THAT MAKE THESE TRIPS BEARABLE. (NICK WAS ALSO
BROUGHT IN TO HELP OUT ON THE COSTA RICA TRIP)
*
IT'S AN EXCITING TIME FOR AMERICA. AND PARTICULARLY FOR YOU
AND HERE IN BRUSSELS. YOU'VE ALL SEEN THE REPORTS OUT OF MALTA,
ARE STANDING ON THE THRESHOLD OF A NEW ERA IN OUR
OUR MEETING HERE WITH OUR PARTNERS IN THE ALLIANCE. WE
EDGE. RELATIONSHIPS WITH THE EAST, AND YOU HERE ARE ON THE CUTTING
*
(HERE, YOU MAY WANT TO GIVE THEM A PERSONAL ANECDOTE OR
REFLECTION ABOUT PRESIDENT GORBACHEV OR YOUR MEETING)
-2-
* THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMITMENT AND YOUR DEDICATION. GOD
BLESS YOU AND GOD BLESS THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
-3-
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
November 9, 1989
STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT
AND QUESTION AND ANSWER SESSION
The Oval Office
3:34 P.M. EST
THE PRESIDENT: We just wanted to make a brief statement
here. I've just been briefed by the Secretary of State and my
National Security Advisor on the latest news coming out of Germany.
And, of course, I welcome the decision by the East German leadership
to open the borders to those wishing to emigrate or travel. And
this, if it's implemented fully, certainly conforms with the Helsinki
Accords -- Helsinki Final Act, which the GDR signed.
And if the GDR goes forward now, this wall built in '61
will have very little relevance. And it clearly is a good
development in terms of human rights. And I must say that after
discussing this here with the Secretary of State and the National
Security Advisor, I am very pleased with this development.
Q
Mr. President, would the United States now consider
doing more to help West Germany house, to take care of some of these
East Germans coming into that country? Is there more that you could
do now to help West Germany accommodate --
THE PRESIDENT: Well, we have such a close relationship
with the Federal Republic that if we're -- Chancellor Kohl asks us to
be of some assistance, I'm certain we would give it serious
consideration. I mean, I don't know what it is they'd have in mind,
because I think with a truly open border, it is hard to predict how
many will be trying to leave. And so it's a dynamic development, and
we just have to wait and see. But our relationship with the Federal
Republic is such that we would want to be of the maximum help if it
was needed. So far, Germany has done a magnificent job in handling
those who have preceeded -- this new exodus.
Q
Have you assured Mr. Kohl that if he does need help
that we'll be there for them?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I haven't talked to him, Lesley,
since this development because he just went off to Poland. I talked
to him about this last week and made very clear to him that we
thought -- I think it was last week -- made very clear to him that we
thought they were handling it with great sensitivity. It's an
enormous burden on the Federal Republic, and I don't remember in that
conversation if I said if we can be of any help, please let me know,
but I'm sure he knows that's the case.
Q
Did he give any indication of how far he'd be able
to go to accommodate this influx of refugees? I think the number
stands at about 110,000 now. Did he say if it hits a million we're
going to have real problems?
THE PRESIDENT: No, he didn't go into numbers at all, but
he demonstrates a quiet confidence that the Federal Republic can
cope. As I say, they have done a good job. And here's a new
development in this rapidly-changing part of the world that we can
salute. And it's a dramatic happening for East Germany, and of
course for freedom.
MORE
- 2 -
Q Is this the end of the Iron Curtain, sir?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I don't think any single event is
the end of what you might call the Iron Curtain, but clearly this is
a long way from the harsh days of the -- the harshest Iron Curtain
days -- a long way from that.
Q
Mr. President, what do you think the implications
are for the Warsaw Pact now? I mean, can we say that this may be an
indication that they're headed toward a loosening or even a
dismantling of the Warsaw Pact?
THE PRESIDENT: I think you have to say what you mean by
Warsaw Pact. I mean, it seems to me that it's certainly a loosening
up in terms of travel. It concurs with the Helsinki Final Act, and
it is a very good development.
Our objective is a Europe whole and free. And is it a
step towards that? I would say yes. Gorbachev talks about a common
home. Is it a step towards that? Probably SO.
Q Mr. President, what's the danger --
Q What do you think the implications are for our --
for emigration to this country, Mr. President? Do you think we'll be
seeing very many of these new refugees?
THE PRESIDENT: There's no indication of that. These are
Germans going to the Federal Republic of Germany.
Q
What's the danger here of events just spinning out
of control? Secretary Baker commented earlier about how rapid the
pace of change has been in Eastern Europe. Nobody really expected
this to happen as quickly as it did. Is there a danger here that
things are accelerating too quickly?
THE PRESIDENT: I wouldn't want to say this kind of
development makes things to be moving too quickly at all. It's the
kind of development that we have long encouraged by our strong
support for the Helsinki Final Act. So I'm not going to hypothecate
that it may -- anything goes too fast.
Q So you don't see --
THE PRESIDENT: But we are handling it in a way where we
are not trying to give anybody a hard time. We're saluting those who
can move forward with democracy. We are encouraging the concept of a
Europe whole and free, and so we just welcome it. But I don't like
to go into a lot of hypotheses about too much change or too rapid
change or what I'd do, what our whole team here would do if something
went wrong. I think it's been handled by the West very well, and
certainly we salute the people in East Germany, the GDR, whose
now. aspirations for freedom seem to be a little further down the road
Q
Mr. President, do you think now that East Germany
appears to be moving in the direction of Poland and Hungary that the
of Czechlosovakia, Bulgaria, Romania? Will they be the next?
rest of the Eastern Bloc can continue to resist this? I'm thinking
THE PRESIDENT: No, I don't think anyone can resist it --
in Europe or in the Western Hemisphere.
Q Did you ever imagine --
dynamic change in Central America -- moving in our direction.
THE PRESIDENT: That's one of the great things about
Q Did you ever imagine anything like this happening?
Q
On your watch?
MORE
- 3 -
THE PRESIDENT: We've imagined it, but I can't say that I
foresaw this development at this stage. Now I didn't foresee it.
But imagining it, yes. When I talk about.a Europe whole and free,
we're talking about this kind of freedom to come and go, this kind of
staying with and living by the Helsinki Final Act, which gives the
people the rights to come and go.
Q
In what you just said, that this is a sort of great
victory for our side in the big East-West battle but you don't
seem elated. And I'm wondering if you're thinking of the problems.
THE PRESIDENT: I am not an emotional kind of guy.
Q Well, how elated are you?
THE PRESIDENT: I'm very pleased. And I've been very
pleased with a lot of other developments. And, as I've told you, I
think the United States' part of this, which is not related to this
development today particularly, is being handled in a proper fashion.
And we'll have some that'll suggest more flamboyant courses of action
for this country, and we're, I think, handling this properly with
allies, staying in close touch in this dynamic change. Try to help
economic. as development takes place, try to enhance reform, both political and
And so, the fact that I'm not bubbling over, maybe it's
getting along towards evening, because I feel very good about it.
Q
Well, what I wanted to ask is the second part of
that was, is your second thought -- what are we going to do if it
really does explode over there coming into play here? I mean,
obviously, if they just flood into West Germany, they're handling it
now, but they've only gotten 200,000. What if they get a million?
What if they get 2 million?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, what I'd like to think is that the
political change in the GDR would catch up very fast with this
liberation, if you will. You may remember that, before I went to
Poland, I think -- I don't know whether Jim Baker was sitting next to
me. I know Brent was there and John Sununu. And I was asked by a
Polish journalist if I were a young Pole, what would my advice be.
And what I said is, I think you ought to stay there and participate
in this dramatic change in your country. You ought to feel the surge
of freedom, feel the move toward democracy and be a part of it.
These are Germans. And Germans love their country. And
at some point, I think a lot of Germans who had felt pent in and
unable to move are going to say, look, we can move. But wouldn't it
be better to participate in the reforms that are taking place in our
own country?
So I think it's too early to predict that because these
openings are there that that means everybody is going to take off.
Q Do you think this will give you a stronger position
when you go on the ship next month and you're talking to President
Gorbachev? I mean, that your side is winning? I mean, is that the
kind of thing you're going to communicate to him? Are you going to
say the --
THE PRESIDENT: He's already expressed his interest in a
common European home. We've phrased it differently. We've said a
Europe whole and free. And when you see citizens wanting to go and
that flee what has been an oppressive society, clearly that is a message
Mr. Gorbachev will understand. He sees it not only in Eastern
Europe, but he sees it inside the Soviet Union. And so we'll have a
good, lively before, these developments took place, I have said
And we've been talking about that today, just before you all came in
that we would be discussing the rapid change inside Eastern Europe.
here. We've been talking about the Gorbachev meeting. And one of
the things that we are determined we will discuss -- and I know he'll
want to discuss -- is this change.
MORE
- 4 -
Q
Mr. President, are you saying you think maybe East
Germans will want to stay and participate in reforming their country.
That suggests you think German reunification is some ways off. What
is your view on German reunification? Does this bring it closer?
THE PRESIDENT: I don't see the -- I don't know. I think
it's way too early to speak on that. I've spoken out on the question
of German reunification. I notice the President of France, President
Mitterrand, spoke out. I've heard what Chancellor Kohl has had to
say about it. But Michael, I don't know whether the development of
today speeds up the day or not.
Q
Mr. President, will you consider lifting
Jackson-Vanik restrictions on East Germany?
THE PRESIDENT: I will be discussing a wide array of
those subjects with the Soviets, I'm sure, including -- I know of
their interest in talking about that, so we'll be prepared to talk
about it.
Q Are you going to be speaking to Chancellor Kohl in
the next couple of days?
THE PRESIDENT: I'd like to talk to him soon, but he's
off in Poland. I may try to get him there, but I talked to him quite
recently. We confer quite regularly.
Q
Do you talk to any of the other Western European --
Q Will you try to reach Mitterrand?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, personally I don't know. We're in
-- again, I talked to him very recently, but he might want to talk
about it.
THE PRESS: Thank you.
END
3:47 P.M. EST
Foreign Media Analysis
United States Information Agency
Washington, D.C. 20547
Office of Research
USIA
December 11, 1989
WEST EUROPEAN PRESS SAYS BUSH-GORBACHEV MEETING
ENDED COLD WAR, MALTA WAS NO YALTA
This analysis is based on USIS reporting of major West
European papers December 1-8, 1989. It draws on 250
editorials, commentaries and news analyses appearing
in 70 papers of 12 countries. Papers are characterized
by their dominant views.
Key Findings:
0
Two-thirds of the papers, across the political spectrum, said the Malta
meeting ended the "Cold War."
0
A third said "Malta was no Yalta." The balance were silent on the issue.
The papers commenting said the U.S. and the USSR are no longer in a
position to dictate their will on their allies and are facing events in East
Europe that neither can control.
o
A half said President Bush took the lead at Malta and that Gorbachev
was the weaker of the two. These papers praised them for not upstaging
each other and, for the first time, acting like partners instead of
antagonists. The other papers did not compare the two leaders.
o
A third said arms control agreements now should not be difficult because
of new trust and confidence built at Malta. They said NATO and
Warsaw Pact alliances remain necessary to manage political change in
Europe.
o
A half said the Soviet economy could collapse and Gorbachev's survival
may not be certain. They said the U.S. should "help" the USSR but not
"rescue" it.
"Cold War Is History"
Two-thirds of the papers said four decades of U.S.-Soviet antagonisms were
buried at Malta and the two leaders met as partners to begin a new era. They
said that despite the absence of major decisions a dramatic change from
confrontation to cooperation had occurred.
2
"Malta Was No Yalta"
A third of the papers said European fears about a "new Yalta" were unfounded.
Two-thirds did not comment. Those papers commenting said that Bush and
Gorbachev discussed how they might preserve the primary roles of the two
countries rather than how to dictate their will. The papers claimed that both
the United States and the Soviet Union suffer from "muscular atrophy," and can
no longer control events like the collapse of Communist regimes in Eastern
Europe. They said the United States is stronger than the Soviet Union and is a
more "attractive model to copy," and now holds most "trump cards." A few (4)
suggested that, except for its nuclear arsenal, the Soviet Union can no longer be
called a superpower.
President Bush Took the Lead
A half of the papers said the President took the lead at the meeting, and that
Gorbachev mostly explained and listened. However, both were praised for
acting like partners rather than antagonists and for not upstaging each other.
A few papers (6) suggested that Gorbachev did not try to upstage the U.S. with
spectacular proposals as in previous summits because of his weak domestic
position and desperate need for U.S. economic help.
NATO Still Needed As Guarantor of Stability
A third of the papers, across the political spectrum, said that negotiating and
concluding new conventional and strategic arms reduction agreements should no
longer be difficult in the new atmosphere of greater trust. NATO and Warsaw
Pact alliances may no longer have to rely on military buildups but will be
necessary as instruments of political change and guarantors of stability. These
papers said Europe must take the initiative to control its own future and noted
that while NATO remains politically strong, there is not much unity left in the
Warsaw Pact.
Gorbachev's Survival Is Not Certain
A wide range of opinions centered on Gorbachev's ability to survive the serious
crisis in the Soviet economy. Half said the economy may collapse and that
Gorbachev's tenure depends on whether he can prevent it. These papers said
the U.S. should help the Soviets with investments but not try to "rescue" them
with aid. Opinion was mixed on whether the U.S. should help to preserve
Gorbachev's leadership.
Prepared by: Vello Ederma R 485-7116
FMA-12/11/89
Approved by: Nils H. Wessell, Director of Research 485-2965
3
Sources
Independent
Austria
Die Presse; Der Standard
Belgium
Le Soir
Britain
Financial Times
Finland
Helsingin Sanomat
Netherlands
NRC Handelsblad
Centrist
Britain
The Independent
Italy
La Stampa; Corriere della Sera;
Il Messagero; Stampa Sera
Spain
Diario 16
Switzerland
La Suisse; Tribune de Geneve
West Germany
General-Anzeiger; Sueddeutsche Zeitung;
Westdeutsche Allgemeine; Stuttgarter Zeitung;
Der Tagesspiegel (West Berlin)
Conservative/Rightist
Belgium
Gazet van Antwerpen; La Libre Belgique
Britain
The Times; The Sunday Times;
Daily Telegraph; Sunday Telegraph
Denmark
Jyllands-Posten; Berlingske Tidende
Finland
Uusi Suomi
France
Quotidien; Figaro; economic Les Echos;
financial La Tribune
Italy
Il Giornale; economic Il Sole-24 Ore
Netherlands
De Telegraaf; Algemeen Tagblad; Het Binnenhof
Spain
Ya; ABC
Sweden
Svenska Dagbladet
Switzerland
Aargauer Tagblatt; Neue Zuercher Zeitung
West Germany
right-of-center Frankfurter Allgemeine;
right-of-center Die Welt;
business paper Handelsblatt;
right-of-center Berliner Morgenpost
Liberal/Leftist
Austria
Neue Arbeiterzeitung
Belgium
Het Volk; De Morgen; La Wallonie
Britain
Guardian
Denmark
Politiken; Information; Aktuelt
Finland
Demari; Hufvudstadsbladet
France
Le Monde; Liberation
Italy
La Repubblica
Netherlands
Trouw; De Volkskrant
Spain
El Pais
Sweden
Dagens Nyheter; Expressen
Switzerland
Le Matin
West Germany
left of center Die Zeit;
left-of-center Frankfurter Rundschau;
left-of-center Westfaelische Rundschau;
far-left Die Tageszeitung;
left-of-center Volkblatt Berlin
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
November 15, 1989
STATEMENT BY THE PRESS SECRETARY
The President today announced the private sector members of the
U.S. Presidential Economic Delegation to Poland, scheduled to
visit that country Nov. 28 through Dec. 2 as part of the
Administration's continuing efforts to assist in Poland's
economic reform and restructuring and to support its democratic
transition.
U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Clayton Yeutter will head the
delegation, which will provide the President with recommendations
as to the most effective use of U.S. assistance to Poland, and
assist the Poles in developing their economic restructuring
program.
Other senior Administration officials leading the delegation are
Secretary of Commerce Robert A. Mosbacher, Sr., Secretary of
Labor Elizabeth H. Dole, and Michael J. Boskin, Chairman of the
White House Council of Economic Advisers.
The private-sector members are:
Thomas Carroll, Chief Executive Officer, International Executive
Service Corps, Stamford, Conn.;
Theodore Cooper, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Upjohn
Corp., Kalamazoo, Mich.;
William Donaldson, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer,
Donaldson Enterprises, Inc., New York City, and founding
dean, Yale Graduate School of Organization and Management;
Robert Galvin, Chairman, Motorola Corp., Schumberg, Illinois;
John Gingrich, President, National Pork Producers Council,
Parnell, Iowa;
Robert Georgine, President, Building and Construction Trades
Department, AFL-CIO, Washington, D.C.;
Ray Goldberg, Professor, Harvard University Graduate School of
Business Administration, Boston, Mass.;
Arnold Harberger, Professor, University of Chicago Department of
Economics, Chicago;
Charles M. Harper, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, ConAgra
Corp., Omaha, Neb.;
D. Gale Johnson, Professor, University of Chicago Department of
Economics, Chicago;
- more -
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
November 15, 1989
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
TO THE AFL-CIO CONVENTION
The Sheraton Washington Hotel
Washington, D.C.
3:40 P.M. EST
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you all very much. Lane Kirkland,
thank you, sir. Tom Donahue and, of course, your special guest and
our special guest -- America's special guest -- Lech Walesa.
(Applause.) I've got some good news for you and some bad news for
you. After Lech Walesa's stirring ovation before the United States
Congress today, it is clear that he's ready to run for office in the
United States. (Applause.) Bad news for some of you is he's going
to run as a Republican. Thank you very much. (Laughter.) Now, I
knew you'd like that -- come on.
No, but in all seriousness, this is a great moment for
the AFL-CIO. After eight long years of struggle, Mr. Walesa has
accepted the George Meany Human Rights Award, first intended for
Solidarnosc. Back in 1981, you remember, Lech wasn't allowed to be
here to claim that prize. And the waiting began.
I can really identify with Lech. (Laughter.) I
understand what it's like to wait so long to get here. But I don't
regret a minute of it because, after all it is great to be with you
-- and to see the members who endorsed me sitting back there in the
back row over there. (Laughter.) All four of them. (Laughter and
applause.)
Lately I have been feeling pretty confident. Barbara had
a hunch that I'd be addressing this group today. And this morning
she caught me in the shower singing the "Union Yes" theme song.
(Laughter.)
Let me begin sincerely by congratulating the leadership.
And some of you were over at the White House the other day and I.
really wish every one of you could have been there for the ceremony
in which, not only was Lech Walesa honored by the country, but Lane
Kirkland was as well. (Applause.) He's now serving his 10th year,
continuing the work begun by George Meany before him -- your unions
truly are uniting under the banner of the AFL-CIO, as Lane promised.
UAW, Mine Workers, Teamsters, Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers,
Longshoremen, Warehousemen's Union, Writer's Guild East -- all have
affirmed their ties to this great organization. Lane Kirkland has
done -- as he continues to do -- outstanding work on behalf of
organized labor. (Applause.)
And his work to consolidate and renew labor's strength
gives the AFL-CIO the power to play its best role -- protecting the
rights of working Americans at home and striving for those rights
abroad through the support of democracy around the world.
Labor has been an enduring force for freedom --
(applause) -- at times a lonely cry in the wilderness, at times the
conductor of a thundering chorus -- rejecting all forms of
totalitarianism, fascist and communist alike. With each passing
year, through the labor movement, freedom is finding its voice.
You understand that democracy rests not on cold marble
MORE
- 3 -
enough to remember this and, regrettably, so am I -- during Hitler's
rise to power in the 1930's, American labor was among the very first
to recognize that great evil. You extended your hand in solidarity
to those fighting in the early underground movement.
And then when the Nazi regime was finally destroyed,
American labor went to work building democratic institutions and
these independent trade unions.
And later, when postwar Western Europe was threatened by
the spread of international communism, it was American labor that
stood firm. Tough, behind-the-scenes operators like Irving Brown --
(applause) -- your AFL's European representative -- saw to it that
the Alliance was preserved and democracy prevailed in Western Europe.
When Irving Brown died last winter, after four decades of
fighting for workers' rights, he was widely recognized as an
architect of Western democracy -- symbolizing American labor's
commitment to freedom around the world.
Today the tradition continues -- nowhere more powerfully
than in Poland. The AFL-CIO was at the forefront, standing with
Solidarity in its darkest hour, firm in the belief that the dawn
would come. Because of that support, courageous leaders like Lech
Walesa are now transforming Poland before the eyes of an admiring
world.
Stories of that transformation continue to unfold. Early
in this century, in the Polish town of Lodz, David Dubinsky -- later
to become the renowned head of the ILG -- was arrested for
organizing. In 1908, that would-be organizer was sent from Lodz to
Siberia by the Czar. Last week, a Solidarity candidate was elected
mayor of Lodz. (Applause.) I Poland -- look at how things have
moved.
In Poland, Solidarity unlocked freedom's door. Today,
holding Poland in their hearts as an example and inspiration, workers
around the world are risking everything for democracy. The door
cannot be locked again.
Miners are striking peacefully in the Soviet Union for
the first time since the early 1920's, one of them even calling their
independent union -- and this is high praise for our special guest
today, Lech Walesa -- one of them even calling that union
"Solidarity."
They and those like them offer hope for peaceful change,
which the AFL-CIO is supporting actively through direct contact and
assistance on workers' rights, union organization, collective
bargaining. These are the tools your brothers and sisters abroad
need most to hammer out justice on the anvil of freedom.
With new legislation in the Supreme Soviet recognizing
the right to strike in all but a handful of essential industries, the
people of the Soviet Union now have an opportunity to voice their
grievances. This will be a challenge to President Gorbachev as he
works through Perestroika to raise productivity and living standards
at the same time.
Across Eastern Europe, we see vindication of the
AFL-CIO's refusal to deal with puppet unions controlled by either
employers or governments. Hungarian workers are turning to the
Democratic League of Free Unions. Bulgarian workers are laying the
foundations of a free trade union, to be called "Support." East
German workers have created their first independent trade union, free
of communist influence, to be called "Reform."
The idea that motivated Lech Walesa and the members of
Solidarnosc as they sat down to negotiate with the Polish government
is a powerful one -- that men must be free in order to prosper. That
idea spread to Hungary, where the physical dismantling of the Iron
Curtain began. Uplifted by the hope that Europe will one day be
MORE
- 5 -
year around the world. We grieve deeply for these sacrifices. Let
there be no mistake: We condemn any efforts, by any government, to
try to intimidate democratic unions or their members.
In Thailand, South Korea, Malaysia, the Philipines, the
AFL-CIO's support of worker education, libraries, and conferences on
human rights all add to the inevitable momentum toward worker
representation and collective bargaining.
Workers in Southeast Asia by the millions -- especially
children and young women -- are being used and abused and abandoned.
Looking for a solution, we've enforced worker rights as part of the
Generalized System of Preferences -- and in our trade policy review
mechanism under the GATT, we've incorporated workers rights.
In the long run, the surest solution to the struggle for
workers rights is to support the growth of democratic institutions
like free labor unions -- and to encourage economic development that
will render child labor and nightmarish working conditions not merely
illegal, but unthinkable. (Applause.)
Just as a house is built from the ground up, labor's
house rests on a bedrock principle of free association -- and rises
by the strength of its members. Free trade union movements today
stand on the threshold of change as a leading force for democracy.
Labor's strengh has opened the door to freedom for millions. The
door must remain open.
You know, last week the Soviet Union celebrated the
anniversary of the Bolshevik Revolution. In a protest march, a
banner was carried that said, "Workers of the world, we apologize."
It was the first time in memory that Soviet authorities allowed such
demonstrations on that holiday. That banner is another sign that
democracy is doing the unthinkable, by saying the unspeakable.
The 1984 of George Orwell has come and gone. And I am
hopeful that 1989 will be remembered as the year when American labor,
business and, yes, government first began to work together in a real
partnership for the freedom and dignity of workers everywhere. Not
out of some utopian vision, but because we simply believe in the same
basic values.
The key to freedom rests in our hands. With that key,
nothing is impossible. The door to democracy will remain unlocked,
to each according to his ability to dream.
Thank you all very, very much. God bless you. And may
God bless working people everywhere. And, Lech Walesa, God bless
you, sir. Thank you very, very much. (Applause.)
END
4:00 P.M. EST
Office of the Attorney General
Washington, B. CS20530 7 PM 1: 06
January 16, 1990
The President
The White House
Washington
My dear Mr. President:
On November 30, 1989, you directed me to take certain
actions to improve the immigration status of nationals of the
People's Republic of China ("PRC") currently in the United
States. You requested that I report to you on the status of
these actions. This letter sets forth the actions I have taken.
In each instance, the action I have taken affords relief
equivalent to, or greater than, the relief that would have been
provided by H.R. 2712 (the "bill"). (I have attached copies of
my letter to the Immigration and Naturalization Service ("INS")
of December 1, 1989, and INS' cable to its field offices of the
same date, implementing your directives).
1. You directed that I provide PRC nationals with an
irrevocable waiver, that they may exercise until January 1, 1994,
of the foreign residence requirement of 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (e)
I have waived this requirement for all PRC aliens present in
the United States as of December 1, 1989. This waiver is
irrevocable. Any such alien who makes a nonfrivolous application
for adjustment or any change of status may avail himself of the
waiver until January 1, 1994. This action provides adjustment
relief equivalent to that provided by the bill.
2. You directed that I take steps to assure the continued
lawful status of PRC aliens lawfully present in the United States
on June 5, 1989.
I have directed that PRC aliens who were in lawful status as
of June 5, 1989, be considered to have maintained lawful status
for the purposes of adjustment or change of nonimmigrant status.
Again, this action provides relief equivalent to that provided by
the bill.
3. You directed that I provide authorization for employment
of PRC nationals present in the United States on June 5, 1989.
I have directed that INS grant all PRC aliens who were
present in the United States as of June 5, 1989, the necessary
authorization to engage in employment. This action provides
employment opportunities greater than those afforded by the bill,
which would have granted employment authorization only to certain
PRC aliens, i.e., Chinese students in the F, J, or M visa
categories.
4. You directed that I provide notice of expiration of
nonimmigrant status, rather than institution of deportation
proceedings, to PRC aliens who are eligible for deferral of
enforced departure and whose nonimmigrant status has expired.
I have directed that any PRC aliens who are eligible for
deferral of enforced departure and whose authorized period of
stay has expired be given notice of expiration of nonimmigrant
status. This notice will be nonadversarial in nature and will
explain the options available. This action provides for
notification equivalent to that required by the bill.
5. Finally, you directed that I provide for enhanced
consideration under the immigration laws for individuals from any
country who express a fear of persecution upon return to their
country related to that country's policy of forced abortion or
sterilization.
I have directed that, with respect to all applications for
asylum, withholding of deportation, and refugee status, careful
consideration be given to applicants expressing fear of
persecution related to family planning policies of forced
abortion or sterilization. If an applicant establishes that the
applicant has refused to abort or to be sterilized, he or she
will be considered to have established a well-founded fear of
persecution. All other factors that may contribute to a
determination of eligibility for asylum, withholding of
deportation, and refugee status, will also be given additional
weight. These actions provide broader relief to persons fearing
coercive family planning policies than that provided by the bill,
which extended only to PRC aliens. Draft regulations to
implement this directive, effective upon publication, will be
available within a week.
In addition to these measures, INS has established an
Outreach Program to assist PRC aliens in the United States. INS
has held briefings and consultations with representatives of PRC
student leaders, the National Association of Foreign Student
Affairs, and private groups interested in the PRC, to inform them
of available options. Many INS district offices have also
arranged meetings with local Chinese community and educational
- 2 -
institutions. Each INS District Office has designated a point of
contact specifically to assist PRC nationals under this program.
INS field offices are also making every effort to expedite
the processing of applications for benefits provided under the
emergency relief measures. As of January 12, 1990, INS has
granted work authorization to 2,779 PRC nationals; granted
adjustment to permanent resident status for 87, with 108 cases
still pending; authorized a change in temporary status for 225;
and granted waivers of the foreign residence requirement of
section 1182 (e) for 70.
Initial results of the program indicate that these outreach
efforts have been successful and that PRC aliens are aware of the
available options and are filing applications. of course, I will
continue to monitor developments to assure the success of your
policy of providing necessary relief to PRC nationals present in
the United States.
Sincerely,
Dick Thornburgh
Attorney General
- 3 -
Office of the Attorney General
Washington, a. C. 20530
December 1, 1989
Honorable Gene McNary
Commissioner
Immigration and Naturalization Service
7100 Chester Arthur Building
425 Eye Street
Washington, D.C. 20536
Dear Commissioner:
I am writing to you with regard to an issue of great concern
to the President and this Department: the status of Chinese
nationals who, as of June 5, 1989, were present in the United
States ("Chinese aliens"). In order to eliminate any concern
about their status and to make clear that they are entitled to
remain in the United States, I am directing the Immigration and
Naturalization Service (INS) to undertake the following steps.
First, I have received a favorable recommendation from the
United States Information Agency that I waive the two-year
foreign residency requirement found in 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (e) for
Chinese aliens who, as of June 5, 1989, were present in the
United States. I have determined that the admission of these
aliens into the United States is in the public interest.
Therefore, I hereby waive the two-year residency requirement for
any such alien. These waivers are irrevocable and may be
exercised until January 1, 1994 by any such alien who makes a
nonfrivolous application for adjustment or any change of status.
8 U.S.C. § 1182(e).
Second, I direct that Chinese aliens who were in lawful
status as of June 5, 1989 shall be considered to have maintained
lawful status for purposes of adjustment of status or change of
nonimmigrant status.
Third, INS shall grant all Chinese aliens the necessary
authorization to engage in employment.
Fourth, any Chinese aliens who are eligible for deferral of
enforced departure and whose authorized period of stay has
expired shall be given a notice of expiration of nonimmigrant
status. Such notice shall be nonadversarial in nature and shall
contain an explanation of the options available to such aliens
pursuant to my directives and those of INS.
be deportation, or refugee status, careful consideration shall
tions to the Executive Branch for asylum, withholding of
Finally, with respect to the adjudication of all applica-
upon to their country related to that country's
given return to such an applicant who expresses a fear of persecution now
the planning policy of forced abortion or coerced sterilization. family
abort applicant establishes that such an applicant has refused If
basis established a well-founded fear of persecution
to have or be sterilized, then the applicant will now be considered to
ethnic (such as overt political activities, membership in
factors of political opinion. 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (a) (42). All on other the
which or religious minority, and family background and history) an
eligible for asylum, withholding of deportation, or
may contribute to a determination that an applicant is
regulations. Department of State, issue any necessary implementing
the with the Executive Office for Immigration shall, Review in and
consultation status, are also to be given additional weight. INS refugee
Wall
Attorney General
CC: David L. Milhollan
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
January 11, 1990
FACT SHEET
EMERGENCY COMMITTEE FOR AID TO POLAND
NAME: The Emergency Committee for Aid to Poland (ECAP)
CO-CHAIRMEN: The Honorable Bob Dole
The Honorable Zbigniew Brzezinski
STATUS: ECAP is a non-profit voluntary organization. It enjoys
tax exempt status by virtue of its affiliation with the Polish
American Congress Charitable Fund.
COMMITTEE: See Annexes #1 and #2 for Steering Committee and
Committee membership lists.
EXECUTIVE OFFICE: Ambassador John W. Shirley (Ret.), Executive
Director
Mrs. Paulette Magnuson, Assistant to the
Executive Director
6640 Madison-McLean Drive
McLean, VA 22101
Tel: (703) 506-1088 (703) 506-1089
Fax: (703) 790-1403
- more -
- 2 -
STATEMENT OF PURPOSE
The purpose of the Emergency Committee for Aid to Poland (ECAP)
is to provide to the Polish people an earnest of the desire of
the American people to rally to them in the form of concrete
assistance as they engage in the daunting task of building a
democracy.
RATIONALE
Mindful that the new Solidarity-led government inherited from its
predecessors a failed political system, a bankrupt economy, and a
bureaucracy locked into the mindset of the past, the Committee is
persuaded that the challenges faced by Poland are so great that
they cannot be met by governments alone. The private sector must
do its part to respond to the needs of the most vulnerable
population groups and, in the longer run, provide technical
assistance and training to ease the transition from a
totalitarian social and economic system, to a democracy
responsive to the will of the Polish people.
The Committee believes that it can best meet its objectives by
proceeding in three stages.
STAGE I
The long, cold Polish winter has always been a time of suffering
and want. This winter threatens to be the worst which Poland has
faced in two generations. If help does not come, not only will
the deprivations of the men and women responsible for the rebirth
of democracy in their homeland be intense, but the success of the
struggle in which they are engaged may be in peril of foundering.
The Committee must necessarily narrow its focus so that it might
succor those whose needs are the most urgent.
The winter months will visit particularly severe hardships on two
groups: on infants and young children, and on the sick. to
organize help, the Committee has had extensive discussions with
private individuals, government officials, and with its Polish
counterpart, the Solidarity Social Assistance Fund (Spoleczna
Fundacja Solidarnosci).
In early December, ECAP received from the Solidarity Social
Assistance Fund a list of requirements, including particularly
regular infant formula, specialized infant formula, antibiotics
and expendable medical supplies.
- more -
- 3 -
The response of the American business community to ECAP's efforts
to meet the Polish request has been prompt and generous. The
Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., Pfizer Inc., the Schering-Plough
Corporation, Wyeth-Ayerst Laboratories, and Loma Linda Foods,
have already contributed over one million dollars worth of
products which are now on their way to Poland. Other companies
have assured us of support to enable us to build on this initial
effort for so long as necessity dictates.
STAGE II
Concurrently with the planning and execution of Stage I, and
working closely with the Polish American Congress and others
already engaged in relief efforts, the Committee will address the
question of the needs of the older poor, as well as those of
other groups whose requirements will emerge as events unfold and
as the Committee gains in experience.
The lessons the Committee will have learned during Stage I with
regard to the efficiency of the distribution organizations with
whom it will be working in Poland will be important during Stage
II as bulkier commodities in large quantities are moved from the
Baltic ports inland. (ECAP is keenly sensitive to the need to
work with Polish institutions under the direct control of the
Solidarity-led government, or the Polish Episcopate. Every care
will be taken not to associate the Committee with discredited
organizations still in the hands of the nomenklatura.)
STAGE III
ECAP will sponsor and organize technical assistance programs
based on consultations with its Polish counterparts, and with
other U.S. voluntary organizations.
The decision to explore areas of endeavor beyond traditional
relief efforts is predicated on needs already identified, on
preliminary conversations with members of the new government, and
with the Solidarity Social Assistance Fund.
Illustratively, one of the gravest obstacles to democratization
is the old bureaucracy, steeped in the Communist past, unwilling
and, perhaps, unable to adjust to the needs of the new Poland.
Instituting training programs for local officials to whom the
American experience could be passed on and adapted to Polish
needs, would make an enormous difference in the way services are
delivered to the people and, ultimately, in the relations between
the people and the Mazowiecki and subsequent democratic
governments.
- more -
- 4 -
INQUIRIES
Persons of institutions interested in supporting the work
of the Committee, or who wish to make financial contributions,
should telephone or fax the ECAP Executive Office:
(703) 506-1088 or (703) 506-1089. Our fax number is
(703) 790-1403.
# # #
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
01. Notes
Handwritten notes, Re: foreign policy. (3 pp.)
n.d.
P-5
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Speechwriting, White House Office of
Open on Expiration of PRA
Series:
Grant, Mary Kate
(Document Follows)
Subseries:
Subject File
By SN (NLGB) on 4/5/2005
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Foreign Policy 1989
Date Closed:
12/20/2004
OA/ID Number:
04423
FOIA/SYS Case #:
S
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2005-0482-S
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile.
Power of free enterprise + democ - optimion
Comma Party out of the factories
micromangmat of econ must clase
state ownership
Sophistication ! in saying markist failures
Funeral We calls for USSK to leave the country yusa
shouldn t do that - no we vs
they USER
encourage not incite
East Central Emope - Not Eastern Europe
(Frank tack about the nature of the modern econ world)
They as could it be Hgle by lud of 3000 century,
V. high math of science - right behind
was at end of last century
Japs. 5. Korea.
nationalism V. high - They love Hungary
pro Social Dems
Christian Dems
anti Commies - 10% if vote today
yet we are guests of commies - balance it 1
Condumn of credit
win barbed were down but not a free border
protesters Y opposition = Leror - much fear
wait of see attitude by commoners in gorbacher
We provide confidence of optimism
courge & vision of where going econ /dem
Commercial will radio POTUS station Live - to open shortly b/t arrival
Radio will be operational Emope 1st time operating in com country
cany
5 mins - Prison Hill
a few Americans there
Fides mostly most-democ
free elections
GOH future
Western role
training in elections & TV
Stevie Wonder There too
Joan Bary - China protests -
Steady serious process toward elections
but not ready till next year
going at the right pace don He if upset
it by being too aggressre" should
tell students this Dem elections
among students at univ-
Stress con over dem w/ Hungarian reform
Dem stressed in Poland w/ Walefa
Very much debate on how transition from
dictatorship dem (Spain's example)
privatization issues
military politics reconciled
multiparty system w/commies rectified
his Socialism ? dem/soc or soc dems.
nationalism
maidison quoted in Parliament
They want to be Emopeans & modern
Highest Suicide rate in world
V. conceined about the survival of nation
declining longerity
tragic past -> need vision from POTVS.
Unemployment now conclins uns during this transition
Infation @
Austerity prog not popular of proposed
need necessful companie (after reform)
and solid investment for prosperity
Rubik's cube - big entrepeneur There/opposition
These people invented prestroika of glastnost
in larly 60's -
POTUS coming to su Hungarian people not party
last time in 1983 there - then
most high-rauking us official ever to Visit
management school has been set up to
teach entre preneurial Y management
(by Amb of others) (
FIDEST
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
January 5, 1990
PRESS CONFERENCE BY THE PRESIDENT
The Briefing Room
1:08 P.M. EST
THE PRESIDENT: This morning I met with the Attorney
General, Dick Thornburgh, to discuss the legal process related to the
prosecution of General Noriega.
We are committed to a fair trial and to providing all the
protections guaranteed by the United States Constitution and laws.
The Attorney General assures me that our case is strong, our resolve
is firm, and our legal representations are sound.
Our government is not seeking a deal with Noriega. Our
policy remains that we brought him to this country for prosecution.
I will be ever mindful of this legal process in the days ahead and
will not comment on any aspect of this prosecution or any matters
that could even inadvertently affect the outcome of this case. And
I'm going ask others from this administration to do the same.
Deputy Secretary of State Eagleburger and Deputy
Secretary of Treasury Robson have just given me a report on the
economic reconstruction efforts in Panama. The first action that the
United States took after General Noriega was removed from power was
to release some $400 million in money that was withheld by virtue of
our economic sanctions -- sanctions which are now being lifted --
$140 million, I believe, is already in Panama. The revitalization of
the Panamanian economy is a major pricrity in the months ahead, as
our efforts for humanitarian assistance. And I would say here I've
been very grateful for the medical supplies that have gone to Panama.
I can report today that considerable progress has been
made so far in returning Panama to a normal state of affairs. The
new government has taken charge and President Endara is working
tirelessly to meet the needs of his people. Both Under Secretary
Robson and Eagleburger were very high in their praise of Mr.
Calderon, Mr. Ford and, of course, President Endara. They're
discussing housing programs, business development, bank loans that
will help spur economic growth. We are committed to be a part of
that process.
I want to assure all of the countries of Latin America
that United States policy remains one of a friendly, supportive and
respectful neighbor. We have worked hard and intensively to consult
bilaterally and multilaterally with Latin America, and we will
continue to do that. I personally will be involved in that.
At the Latin American summit in Costa Rica, I pledged
that we would work with the countries of this hemisphere to build a
better life for the citizens. Our policy of cooperation is firm.
Yesterday, I had a lengthy discussion with Prime Minister Felipe
Gonzalez of Spain who is so well respected in this hemipshere as
well. And I share his deep, personal interest in seeing that the
countries of this hemisphere pull together on behalf of democracy and
economic freedom.
I know the yearnings of my fellow leaders in this
hemisphere -- leaders in Latin America -- and I believe they will
support the new government of Panama and they will support the United
MORE
- 2 -
States as we work together in this hemisphere. I've asked the Vice
President, Dan Quayle, to visit a number of these Latin American
countries within the next several weeks to personally deliver this
message. I view this as very, very important diplomacy. And I am
determined not to neglect the democracies in this hemisphere. Some
have felt that we were so infatuated with the change in Eastern
Europe that we were in the process of neglecting this hemisphere.
And that is not the case. And the Quayle trip, in my view, will
help. I have been undertaking consultations directly with leaders
since I've been President. I will resume that, as I said, and the
Vice President will be in a position to explain very clearly not only
U.S. policy, but our aspirations for Panama and, indeed, for this
entire hemisphere.
So that's where we are, and I'd be glad to take a few
questions.
Q Mr. President, you said that the government is not
seeking any kind of a deal concerning Noriega.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
Q
Does that mean that you are irrevocably ruling out
any reducing of charges, increasing of charges? And also, since the
indictment runs from '81 to '86 and you had many contacts,
apparently, with Panama during that period, were you ever aware of
any drug activities on the part of Noriega?
THE PRESIDENT: On the first part of the question,
there's no such plan. The man's entitled to to whatever is granted
him under our law. So there isn't any such plan.
Secondly, I have made some statements in reply to your
second question, so punch it in the computer, and I'll have nothing
more to say about it because I do not want, even inadvertently, to
prejudice this case. But my actions are, in my view, totally
unrelated.
Q
Mr. President, with General Noriega out of Panama
and safely in custody in this country it seems like you may have a
difficult choice in deciding how to maintain order in Panama. Do you
envision keeping a U.S. military peacekeeping force there beyond the
usual contingent of 12,000 troops, or would you like to see the
Panamanian Defense Forces reconstituted?
THE PRESIDENT: One, I'd like to see their police forces,
whatever emerges, reconstituted. Two, we will get our forces that
went in out as soon as possible. Three, I will just say this because
your question obviously understands this, but to those listeners out
there, South Com has had a force there and that force, under the
treaty, will remain there. But the answer is, we want to get those
additional augmented forces out as soon as possible, and we will.
Q
Mr. President, I'd like to try to follow up a
question you were asked when you were here last about secrecy and the
two missions by General Scowcroft to China. As I'm sure you may be
aware, Secretary of State Baker was asked about the first -- what we
then thought was the first China mission on one of the weekend talk
shows, and he indicated that it was indeed. It turned out to be the
second. He has since acknowledged quite openly that his answer was
false and that he felt constrained to give that answer to protect the
secrecy of the mission. And I wondered first, sir, whether you felt
it was worth it for him to have to do that? And second, whether that
sort of thing is acceptable in your administration?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, let me simply say that some things
will be conducted in secrecy. And I know you don't like it. Your
business is to get everything out in the open, and my business is to
conduct the foreign affairs of this country in the way I think I was
elected to -- and for the most part, that will be in the open. But
this move into Panama was held in secrecy, and I think the American
people understand that.
MORE
- 3 -
My move to send people to China was controversial. Some
think that the best way to make change for human rights in China is
isolation. Don't talk to them. Try to punish them by
excommunication. I don't feel that way. And so I asked these people
to go forward, and I don't think Jim Baker would ever deliberately
mislead somebody, and so I will stand with him.
Q
Sir, I believe he indicated that he felt he had to
do that and that he knew what he was doing, that he had to do it.
And I wondered how you felt about it.
THE PRESIDENT: Ask him about it. I support my Secretary
of State.
Q
You talk about your concern about prejudicing the
case, but as you well know, you have called Noriega a thug and other
people in the administration have gone further. You've said he's
poisoning our children. Haven't you already done that and --
THE PRESIDENT: I think I've heard all kinds of
characterizations of him in the press, columnists, even commentators,
presidents, members of the United States Congress. He is now in
custody. Time for rhetoric is over. Time for answering hypothetical
questions that might prejudice the trial is over. I would go back,
Lesley, to help you on that, to Watergate, where there were hearings
-- hearings held, charges made over and over again, editorials
written and voiced, and yet the people received a fair trial. So I
am convinced that our system of justice is so fair that the person
will get a fair trial. But I can tell you from my standpoint, I am
going to bend over backwards and not answer hypothetical questions or
not do anything that might prejudice that.
Q
Can I have a follow-up, please? I want to actually
follow up on Helen.
THE PRESIDENT: Now, that's a separate question.
(Laughter.)
Q But it's a follow-up. Reducing of charges. Are you
saying that if he wants to go for that, if he wants to try to go for
reducing of charges, that we will entertain it? You said --
THE PRESIDENT: No, I'm not saying that. I'm saying he
has a right to do what he wants and let the legal process determine
how that should work out.
or
You're not ruling it out.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I'm not ruling it in. I'm just
saying he's got his rights and we ought not to stand up here and try
to define narrowly what they are.
Q Mr. President, based on your opening remarks and
your comments about the Vice President's trip, it would indicate that
you're concerned about relations with Latin America. Has the actions
you've taken set it back?
THE PRESIDENT: To some degree I am concerned. Because I
am well aware of how our friends south of our border, including my
friend, President Salinas, look at the use of American force
anywhere. So I am concerned about it. I think it's something that's
correctable because I think they know that I have tried a lot of
consultation, that we have exhausted the remedies in this particular
case of multilateral diplomacy. But given the history of the use of
U.S. force, I would be remiss if I didn't face up to the problem that
we must go forward diplomatically now to explain how this President
looks at the protection of American life; that we acted, in our view,
well within our rights, but that we will continue consultation. But
look, I felt strongly about the protection of American life. So
we've got to get them to understand that this isn't a shift away from
what some had termed excessively timid diplomacy.
MORE
- 4 -
Q
Well, Mr. President, wouldn't that indicate that
actually you were continuing old American policies that have upset
the people in Latin America?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, to the degree -- if there is that
perception, then it's up to me and the Secretary. And in this
instance, the Vice President's trip takes on enormous importance to
convince the people of the truth. And that is that we are not
reverting to just a willful -- what's the word I'm groping for here
-- use of force that has no rationale. But when it comes to the
protection of American life, please, our friends south of the border,
understand this President is going to protect it.
I'll tell you one thing that's helped on this, to the
degree there is a problem at all. And that is the way the Panamanian
democracy is now starting to move forward, the certification of the
three people who had been deprived of their right to hold office by
the previous regime. That's been of enormous help. And then I think
the other thing is the reception, the public reception in Panama for
our action. It has been overwhelming -- overwhelming.
Q On that, sir, Lee Atwater, the Chairman of the RNC,
says Panama is a political jackpot for you and it could will wipe out
the disenchantment, for example, for the way you handled China.
Without saying that's why you went into Panama, sending troops in, is
one effect of it that it is a political jackpot?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, Jesse Jackson doesn't think so. He
talked to my wife. And so there's differences of opinion on that.
But I didn't do something for political reason. That's not the
reason I do that. I did it to protect American life. A President's
called on to take certain actions. We're not going in to try to
furbish a political image; that's ridiculous.
Q
Having said that, though, have you now neutralized
the Democrats on foreign policy? Is this the last time George
Mitchell can ever accuse you of having a timid foreign policy?
THE PRESIDENT: Knowing George, he'll find a reason,
he'll find a way. And that's his job. Look, we're going into an
election year. But I want to try if I can to separate the response
-- and he's been supportive of this. Let's give the man credit. But
I don't think it's laid to rest or put off bounds any criticism of
the President by Democratic opposition if that's the question -- no,
absolutely not.
Q
Mr. President, do you anticipate that the combat
troops -- the bulk of the additional combat troops sent into Panama
will indeed be out by the end of this month, as some administration
officials have said? And secondly and more broadly, do you now see
an expanded role for the American military in small, regional issues
like this one, or more particularly in the war against drugs, since
there was a strong connection to this operation?
THE PRESIDENT: I see no parallel between the situation
here where American lives are at stake and you had an indicted person
who usurped power and declared war against the United States -- I
don't think you can draw a parallel between that unique situation and
then other countries.
What was the other part of it?
Q
The bit about whether you see these additional
combat troops able to come home, all of them.
THE PRESIDENT: As soon as possible. And I have made
clear to the Secretary of Defense, to the Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs who is down in Panama right now, I believe that this is what
we should do, this is what they themselves want to do. Some U.S.
forces that went in are already out, so I would look for an early
return.
MORE
- 5 -
Q
General time frame?
THE PRESIDENT: Can't help you. But as soon as General
Powell gets back, we'll have a more --
Q
What about the international law implications?
Isn't this something that you are also going to talk to the Latin
American countries?
THE PRESIDENT: Absolutely.
Q Isn't this setting a precedent? What is the
explanation behind it?
THE PRESIDENT: The right to protect American lives
granted under the U.N. Charter, and we will protect lives of
citizens, and we will go forward with that. The State Department, as
I understand it, has already spelled that out. But I think you raise
a good point. Yes, we should make very clear why we acted and under
what authority we acted, as we did.
Q
Mr. President, you just described Panama as a unique
case. And I'd just like to ask you sort of a philosophical question.
If the criteria you listed here -- protecting American lives, having
exhausted all the other diplomatic options -- presented themselves
again, should we look in a Bush presidency for more such deployments
in military force if your criteria were met?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, if you can spell out what the
criteria is, and then if you can look to the future to see the
situation surrounding it. I can't visualize another situation quite
this unique. But let me just say when American life is threatened --
we were concerned in El Salvador, for example -- a civilian hotel
could well have been occupied by a guerrilla force that would have
threatened the use of -- threatened American life. That concerned
me. And indeed, we moved forces not in some macho way, but to try to
protect the lives of American citizens. But I think most people
understood that. But I don't see -- David, I don't see another real
parallel here looming on the horizon at all.
Q Mr. President, back to the issue of China. Your
decision to send emissaries to China carried some cause for you.
Have you seen any payoff yet? Have you had any response from the
regime there that is productive or encouraging for you?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, it does carry some, and I think
some who are familiar with the situation have been quite supportive
-- and some quite critical -- I will admit that. As I indicated,
some favor isolation - -- don't talk and let them come to us. I think
one of the great things that happened to us is -- under the Shanghai
communique and prior to that is the fact that we had a kind of
contact and they began to see -- began to facilitate our contact --
help facilitate the changes and the reforms that have taken place.
So I want to see those go forward again.
Is that responsive? I can't remember --
Q
Let me ask you specifically are we close to a
resolution on the issue of the dissidents who are --
THE PRESIDENT: I don't know the answer to that. I don't
know the answer to that. They know my position, and it is one of
adherence to human rights, I might add. The thing I object to about
this whole one is the assigning of motives to the other person. You
can question the tactics, but I refuse to let my political critics
get me down in terms of they understand human rights and I don't.
I want to see, through the contacts that we've made,
change that can be manifested in several ways. Now, there has been
some. The Voice of America, for example, now has -- they have a
person permitted to go there. There's been a reiteration of the sale
MORE
- 6 -
of missiles which we are very much in our -- I think in the interest
of peace in the world. So there's been progress. And hopefully -- I
would like to hope that there would be more.
&
Mr. President, as you know, Mikhail Gorbachev has
been visiting the Baltics in his country to deal with the growing
independence or autonomy movement there. Have you encouraged him to
allow those movements to continue, or do you consider that
essentially an internal affair of the Soviet Union?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, he's got his own internal affairs,
but he knows of our advocacy of peaceful change. And to the man's
credit, he has been the big advocate of peaceful change. He has been
the advocate of reform. I mean, you've got to link it, Jerry, to
Eastern Europe to some degree. And I realize -- and we can discuss
this -- that the problems are different. But give the credit that I
don't think any of us a year ago from this day would have given in
terms of Soviet adherence to -- Gorbachev adherence to change, given
the dynamic upheaval in Eastern Europe.
Now, he's facing problems inside the borders of the
Soviet Union. The Baltics recently this other one -- and he keeps
reiterating his conviction about peaceful change. So I support that.
But we did have an opportunity to discuss in broad philosophical
terms this question at Malta.
Q
Are you confident as a result that there's not going
to be a crackdown?
THE PRESIDENT: I'm certainly not buying into the
hypothesis that there will, and I hope that this approach that he has
taken for which we give credit will prevail.
Q
Yes, Mr. President, several times today you've made
reference to the U.S. right to -- indeed, your obligation to protect
American lives. Today, an American nun is being buried here in the
United States. Even the Catholic order she represented there in
Nicaragua claims that she was killed by Contra forces.
THE
PRESIDENT:
did claim that? I heard --
Q
Representatives of that group say the Contra forces
have been known to operate in that area using those tactics, and
perhaps they didn't recognize the pickup truck that they were driving
in. What do we know about who may have killed those nuns, and what
are you doing to communicate to the Contra -- are you trying to call
them off?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, we're not calling them off because
we don't know they were called on. And I'm interested in your
hypothesis because you're telling me that some have concluded that it
was the Contras. The Contras have denied that. Some have suggested
it might be the other side. And the answer is, I deplore the loss of
that nun's life. And similiarly, there was another that I believe
was killed that was a Nicaraguan there. And I deplore that loss of
life. But it is murky. It is extraordinarily murky, similarly to
the situation in El Salvador.
But I want to take this opportunity to speak out against
it. But we don't know the answer to it. And in El Salvador, we've
said, find out. We'll give you whatever technical assistance we can.
And we want to find the answer to this question.
Q
But you're not confident then that the Contras
didn't
THE PRESIDENT: I don't know the answer to your question.
They've said they didn't -- others are accusing them. And I don't
know, and I don't think our government knows. I'd share it with you
if they did.
Q
Mr. President, in Panama we saw women leading troops
MORE
- 7 -
in combat for the first time. Are you comfortable with women in that
role and would you support changes in restrictions on women in
combat?
THE PRESIDENT: No. I think this is a matter -- I'd
willingly accept -- listen to recommendations from the Defense
Department. But these were not combat assignments. But anytime you
have a highly trained, gung-ho volunteer force and they're caught up
in some of the firefights that went on, a person, man or woman, can
be inflicted into a -- put into a combat situation.
But it's my understanding -- and I think Cheney took a
question on that today -- that these were not combat roles. And so I
would let the heroic performance of these people be weighed and
measured and then see if the Defense Department wanted to recommend
to the President any additional changes.
Q
Do you have assurances from Moscow that the
operation in Panama won't hurt U.S. -Soviet relations?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I'm confident -- they didn't seem
overly enthused about it, by Mr. Gerasimov's statement, but on the
other hand, we -- I don't agree with him at all, but I don't think
it's going to fundamentally flaw the relationships between ourselves
and the United States. *
or
Do you think that the Latin leaders have been
hypersensitive to the -- given the fact that in back channels,
apparently, they've been supportive of the invasion? Can you say if
that is correct? And then also because of that, do you think they're
hypersensitive in their public statements about U.S. force in the
region?
THE PRESIDENT: I like to feel that, given the way the
situation is resolved, there is more support than has manifested
itself in votes at the United Nations or in public statements. The
Vice President's trip will help on this. My own consultations will
help decide -- give me a clearer answer to your question, but I am
absolutely convinced, given what happened and the reason why it
happened, that if there's damage I can repair it, we can repair it,
the State Department and whoever else is involved can repair it.
Q
But is it hypersensitive, their reaction so far?
THE PRESIDENT: I think predictably so.
Q
Mr. President, some countries think the precedent
now of Panama -- feel that their sovereignty might be violated if the
United States pursues drug dealers in their countries. And there has
been some change in laws that can be -- that they are worried about
this in the sense of the CIA, the FBI going out, being able to
apprehend people outside the United States territory.
THE PRESIDENT: And so the question is what?
Q
Do these countries have reason to be worried that
the precedent of Panama might serve as --
THE PRESIDENT: Oh. Panama was more than that. Panama
had clearly other ingredients that caused American action. It wasn't
a simple case of going after a person who had been indicted for
narcotics. And we know you had the abortion of democracy, but you
also had this threat to the lives of Americans.
* Soviet Union
MORE
- 8 -
Let me do something in conclusion that may be a little
risky, and it's a housekeeping detail and it relates mainly to
television.
I got a lot of mail after the last press conference. I
had some calls. Because when I was speaking here in this room,
juxtaposed against my frivolous comments at the time were some
split-screen technique. It showed American lives -- the bodies of
dead soldiers, the caskets of dead soldiers coming home. And I would
respectfully request that if the urgency of the moment is such that
that technique is going to be used, if I could be told about and
we'll stop the proceedings. or if it's something less traumatic.
But that one -- I could understand why the viewers were concerned
about this. They thought their President at a solemn moment like
that didn't give a damn. And I do. I do. I feel it so strongly.
So please help me with that if you would. Thank you all very much.
THE PRESS: Thank you.
END
1:35 P.M. EST
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
December 20, 1989
STATEMENT BY THE PRESS SECRETARY
President Bush met with his national security advisers Sunday
afternoon at 2:30 in the Residence to consider the situation in
Panama. They met for approximately 90 minutes. President Bush
asked for options and an action plan to achieve four objectives:
protect American lives, support democracy, bring the fugitive
Manuel Noriega to justice, and protect the integrity of the
Panama Canal Treaties.
On Monday, the President maintained his normal schedule of
activities. Plans were being made at all levels of the command
structure for the operation scheduled to commence at 1:00
Wednesday morning.
On Tuesday afternoon, President Bush met with the Vice President
and his national security advisers in the Oval Office at about
3:00 to discuss final plans for the military operation in Panama.
The President was briefed on the readiness of all aspects of the
plan. General Scowcroft, the President's National Security
Adviser, laid out an hour-by-hour plan for the rest of the day
and evening prior to the time of launch. That plan included
activities of all the Departments and Agencies and all White
House Staff in the carrying out of this complex arrangement. The
President was satisfied the planning was comprehensive.
The President continued to conduct his normal schedule, including
attending the White House Christmas Party Tuesday evening. The
President received updates on the status of preparations
throughout the evening. General Scowcroft and Governor Sununu
visited with the President at several points. Early evening, the
President called the Congressional Leadership to discuss the
action with them.
The Deputies Committee of the National Security Council was
convened at midnight to begin monitoring the operational aspects
of the Panama action. They were convened by National Security
Council Deputy Director Robert Gates and continued to meet
throughout the night and most of the day Wednesday. The Press
Office Staff was alerted to prepare for an early morning briefing
shortly after 1:00 a.m., and the White House Press Corps was
notified accordingly. In addition, the Pentagon pool had been
activated earlier in the evening to accompany U.S. forces to
Panama.
President Bush arrived in the Oval Office shortly before 1:00
a.m. to monitor the progress throughout the night. He was
wearing a dark blue sweater over his shirt and tie. The mood was
businesslike, as various members of the President's security team
moved in and out of the Oval Office with reports of progress.
As we outlined in Wednesday morning's briefing, the President
spent most of the night calling American leaders and Members of
Congress. Vice President Quayle, Secretary Baker, Governor
Sununu, and National Security Adviser Scowcroft spent most of the
evening with the President in his private study, occasionally
stepping out to make phone calls to various leaders around the
world. Secretary Cheney, General Powell, Director Webster,
Attorney General Thornburgh and others carried out their
respective functions at their appropriate control center.
- more -
- 2. -
The President was somber throughout the night, worried about the
possibility of casualties, and anxious for any word of specific
military progress. He watched the White House announcement of
the military action on the television in his study. He made
notes on 5x7 blue Presidential notepads as he talked to various
leaders. He reported to aides that the phone calls were going
well, mostly supportive. Everyone the President called was
appreciative of his making the effort on this early notification.
The President retired to the Residence at approximately 4:00 in
the morning, when it was decided that he would address the
American people at 7:00 a.m. The President returned to the Oval
Office at approximately 6:30 to review his remarks, and make
editorial changes. Because of the time involved, the President
was not able to use the teleprompter normally associated with the
Presidential statement. The President read from the typewritten
print, making notations in the margin only minutes before air
time.
After delivering his Address to the Nation, the President
remained in the Oval Office for the rest of the day, meeting with
diplomatic representatives. All other events previously
scheduled for the day were canceled with the exception of the
Presentation of Diplomatic Credentials, so that the President
could concentrate on the action in Panama. He continues to
receive military updates from General Scowcroft, General Powell,
Secretary Cheney, and others. Vice President Quayle spent a good
deal of time with the President during the day discussing the
progress of the operation.
The President received a series of reports on the success of the
military in securing various objectives of the pre-planned
mission.
At approximately 3:00, the President met with his National
Security Advisers to receive an operational update, which we
commented upon in a previous press statement. The President's
operational briefing was similar to the one given to the press at
5:00 this afternoon by General Kelly in the Pentagon.
This evening the President will again attend the Christmas Party
and then retire to the Residence. He is pleased by the military
precision and smoothness of the operation. The President has
been told by military leaders that this has been one of the most
effective and efficiently conducted operations in some time. The
President will continue to receive monitored reports throughout
the evening on the status of the Panamanian situation.
The President's National Security Advisers who met with him at
various times during the last three days included: Vice
President Quayle; Secretary of State Baker; Secretary of Defense
Cheney; Director of Central Intelligence Bill Webster; General
Colin Powell, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; General
Brent Scowcroft, the President's National Security Council
Adviser; Robert Gates, Deputy National Security Adviser; and
Richard Thornburgh, Attorney General of the United States.
# # #
REMARKS: WELCOMING BANQUET TOAST
GREAT HALL OF THE PEOPLE
BEIJING, CHINA
SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1989
PRESIDENT YANG, PREMIER LI, DISTINGUISHED GUESTS:
BARBARA AND I ARE DELIGHTED TO BE RETURNING ONCE
AGAIN TO CHINA. I FIRST CAME HERE IN 1974 AND DEPARTED AT
THE END OF 1975. SINCE THEN, INCLUDING THIS VISIT, I HAVE
BEEN BACK 5 TIMES; BARBARA 6 TIMES.
2
AND, EACH TIME WE COME, WE ARE FASCINATED BY THE DYNAMIC
CHANGE AND GROWTH, ALL OF WHICH TAKES PLACE AGAINST AN
EXTRAORDINARY, UNCHANGING BACKDROP OF A GREAT CULTURE
SEVERAL THOUSAND YEARS OLD.
THERE IS A CHINESE PROVERB THAT SAYS "ONE GENERATION
PLANTS A TREE, THE NEXT SITS IN ITS SHADE." AND THERE IS
A TIMELESS WISDOM IN THAT. BUT THANKS TO YOUR REFORMS --
COURAGEOUS REFORMS, AND I DON'T MINIMIZE THE DIFFICULTIES
-- THE CHINESE PEOPLE ARE PLANTING GREAT AND STURDY TREES
SOME OF WHICH ARE BEARING FRUIT RIGHT NOW, FOR THIS
GENERATION.
3
TODAY, THE PEOPLE OF CHINA HAVE MORE OPPORTUNITIES TO
EXPRESS THEMSELVES AND TO MAKE IMPORTANT DECISIONS IN
THEIR PERSONAL AND PROFESSIONAL LIVES. Your NEW AND
FARSIGHTED ECONOMIC PROGRAM IS ALREADY IMPROVING THE LIVES
OF THE PEOPLE, AS IT WILL FOR GENERATIONS TO COME. THE
EXPANSION OF YOUR INTERNATIONAL RELATIONSHIPS IS ALSO
CREATING NEW POSSIBILITIES FOR PEACE, PROSPERITY, AND
WORLD LEADERSHIP, AND THE UNITED STATES WELCOMES THE
ENLARGED ROLE THAT CHINA HAS TAKEN IN THE WORLD.
4
WHEN I FIRST ARRIVED IN BEIJING IN 1974, IT WAS A
PERIOD WHEN OUR TWO COUNTRIES WERE JUST BEGINNING TO RENE!
CONTACT AFTER ALMOST A QUARTER CENTURY OF ESTRANGEMENT.
IT WAS NOT EASY; THERE WERE GREAT DIFFERENCES BETWEEN US.
BUT IN THE PRINCIPLES OF THE HISTORIC SHANGHAI COMMUNIQUE
SIGNED 17 YEARS AGO THIS COMING MONDAY, WE FOUND A COMMON
BASIS FOR MOVING BEYOND THOSE DIFFERENCES TO FIND OUR
SHARED INTERESTS. So, TOGETHER, WE HELPED TO PLANT A
TREE. AND WE SHOULD KEEP PLANTING TREES.
5
WE VALUE THE NEW RELATIONSHIP OUR TWO COUNTRIES HAVE
ESTABLISHED WITH EACH OTHER. OUR FRIENDSHIP IS CONTINUING
TO DEVELOP, AND THAT IS GOOD. FOR A RELATIONSHIP MUST BE
STRONG ENOUGH TO TACKLE AREAS OF DISAGREEMENT AS WELL AS
THOSE OF COMMON INTEREST, AND IT MUST BE BASED ON RESPECT
FOR THE INDIVIDUAL AS WELL AS THE INTEGRITY OF STATES.
WE REMAIN FIRMLY COMMITTED TO THE PRINCIPLES SET
FORTH IN THE THREE JOINT COMMUNIQUES THAT FORM THE BASIS
OF OUR RELATIONS.
IT
6
AND BASED ON THE BEDROCK PRINCIPLE THAT THERE IS BUT ONE
CHINA, WE HAVE FOUND WAYS TO ADDRESS TAIWAN CONSTRUCTIVELY
AND WITHOUT RANCOR. WE AMERICANS HAVE A LONG HISTORICAL
FRIENDSHIP WITH CHINESE PEOPLE EVERYWHERE, WHETHER THEY
ARE IN TAIWAN, HONG KONG, OR IN OUR OWN COUNTRY, JUST AS
WE HAVE A NEW AND IMPORTANT RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PEOPLE':
REPUBLIC OF CHINA.
7
AND IN THE LAST FEW YEARS WE HAVE SEEN AN ENCOURAGING
EXPANSION OF FAMILY CONTACTS, TRAVEL, INDIRECT TRADE, AND
OTHER FORMS OF PEACEFUL INTERCHANGE ACROSS THE TAIWAN
STRAIT, WHICH HAS COME NOT FROM OUTSIDE PRESSURE, BUT FROM
THE INTERESTS OF THE CHINESE PEOPLE THEMSELVES. THIS
TREND -- THIS NEW ENVIRONMENT -- IS CONSISTENT WITH
AMERICA'S PRESENT AND LONG-STANDING INTEREST IN A PEACEFUL
RESOLUTION OF THEIR DIFFERENCES BY THE CHINESE THEMSELVES.
8
THE UNITED STATES AND THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA
HAVE ALSO FOUND COMMON INTEREST IN A GROWING ECONOMIC
RELATIONSHIP. WHEN I CAME HERE IN 1974, OUR TWO-WAY TRADE
TOTALED ABOUT $900 MILLION; NOW IT IS SOME $14 BILLION.
FOR THIS WE MUST CREDIT THE REFORMS CHINA EMBARKED UPON
TEN YEARS AGO UNDER CHAIRMAN DENG XIAOPING'S FARSIGHTED
LEADERSHIP.
9
AND WE HAVE SEEN GREATER EXCHANGES IN EDUCATION AS
WELL, WITH TENS OF THOUSANDS OF CHINESE STUDENTS NOW
STUDYING IN THE UNITED STATES, JUST AS THOUSANDS OF U.S.
SCHOLARS HAVE STUDIED AND TAUGHT IN THE FARTHEST CORNERS
OF CHINA.
AND WE HAVE DEVELOPED AN ACTIVE PROGRAM OF MILITARY
COOPERATION THAT IS FORGING TIES OF FRIENDSHIP BETWEEN OUR
DEFENSE ESTABLISHMENTS, EVEN AS WE HAVE FOUND A DIPLOMATIC
UNITY IN OUR SHARED OPPOSITION TO POLICIES OF
INTERNATIONAL AGGRESSION AND DOMINATION.
10
OUR TWO COUNTRIES, AS NUCLEAR POWERS AND AS PERMANENT
MEMBERS OF THE U.N. SECURITY COUNCIL, HAVE A SPECIAL
RESPONSIBILITY FOR PRESERVING WORLD PEACE. WE OWE IT TO
MANKIND TO WORK TOGETHER FOR PEACE AND INTERNATIONAL
STABILITY.
THE UNITED STATES HAS PRESSED FORWARD WITH THE SOVIET
UNION IN THE ARMS REDUCTION PROCESS, ACHIEVING UNDER THE
I.N.F. TREATY AN AGREEMENT TO ELIMINATE U.S. AND SOVIET
INTERMEDIATE-RANGE NUCLEAR MISSILES, ON OUR INSISTENCE,
FROM ASIA AS WELL AS EUROPE.
11
WE ARE MINDFUL OF THE DANGER POSED TO OTHER COUNTRIES BY
THE PROLIFERATION OF DEADLY WEAPON TECHNOLOGIES, INCLUDING
CHEMICAL WEAPONS, PARTICULARLY IN REGIONS OF THE WORLD
MARKED BY CONFLICT.
THE PROSPECT OF IMPROVED RELATIONS BETWEEN CHINA AND
THE SOVIET UNION INSPIRES HOPE FOR NEW PROGRESS IN THE
SEARCH FOR SELF-DETERMINATION AND PEACE FOR THE CAMBODIAN
PEOPLE AND STABILITY FOR KOREA.
12
THERE CAN BE LITTLE DOUBT THAT EVEN AS THE PEOPLE OF
OUR TWO COUNTRIES ARE WATCHING THIS MEETING, THE WORLD AS
A WHOLE IS WATCHING THE LARGER MOVEMENT OF OUR TWO GREAT
NATIONS AS WE BUILD EVER FIRMER BONDS ACROSS THE VAST
OCEAN THAT JOINS US.
BARBARA AND I HAVE HAD THE GREAT GOOD FORTUNE TO
TRAVEL ACROSS YOUR VAST AND BEAUTIFUL LAND AS GUESTS OF
THE CHINESE PEOPLE.
5
13
WE WENT FROM THE HIGH PLATEAU OF TIBET TO THE GREAT CITY
OF CHENGDU [CHUHNG-D00], WHERE WE VISITED THE HOME OF YOUR
TANG [TAHNG] POET DUFU [D00-F00], AND WHERE WE LATER
PERSONALLY OPENED THE FIRST AMERICAN CONSULATE IN THE
WESTERN PART OF THE P.R.C. WE THEN HAD THE UNFORGETTABLE
EXPERIENCE OF TRAVELING BY BOAT THROUGH THE HAUNTINGLY
BEAUTIFUL AND HISTORIC YANGTZE [YAHNG-ZEH] GORGES WHERE WE
RELISHED THE HISTORY OF THE THREE KINGDOMS AND COULD
ALMOST HEAR THE POET LI Bo's [LEE-BWAH's] DESCRIPTION OF
"MONKEYS WHO SCREAMED FROM THE TWO SIDES WITHOUT
STOPPING."
14
THEN ON TO WUHAN AND THE FIRST BRIDGE TO SPAN THE YANGTZE,
AND FINALLY GUEILIN [GWAY-LIN] AND THE LI RIVER WHERE WE
SAW THE MOUNTAINS AND WATERS OF YOUR PAINTINGS AND POETRY
BARBARA AND I ARE GRATEFUL FOR THE FRIENDSHIP AND
KINDNESS THAT WE HAVE BEEN SHOWN OVER THE YEARS BY THE
CHINESE PEOPLE. AND THE EXPANDING RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN
YOUR COUNTRY AND OURS HAS BEEN A SOURCE OF SATISFACTION TO
US, AS WELL. LET US CONTINUE, THEN, TO WORK TOGETHER, TO
PLANT TREES TOGETHER, so THAT THE NEXT GENERATION, OURS
AND YOURS, CAN SIT TOGETHER IN THE SHADE.
15
So PLEASE LET ME ASK YOU ALL TO JOIN ME, AND BARBARA,
IN A TOAST: To THE HEALTH OF PRESIDENT YANG; TO THE
HEALTH OF PREMIER LI; TO THE HEALTH OF CHAIRMAN DENG AND
GENERAL SECRETARY ZHAO; TO BARBARA'S AND MY DEAR CLOSE
FRIENDS HERE TONIGHT; AND TO SINO-AMERICAN FRIENDSHIP.
GANBEI!
###
FYI
OFFICIAL WORKING VISIT
From
TO WASHINGTON. D.C.
Kristen Gear
DEFINITION
An Official Working Visit to Washington, D.C. is made by either
a Chief of State (President, reigning monarch, or ruler) or by
a Head of Government (Prime Minister, Chancellor). The
invitation is issued by the President of the United States for
the visitor to meet with him for substantive talks or for a
Chief of State or Head of Government who has already received a
State/Official Visit to the United States during a particular
U.S. Administration. A visitor in this category is considered
a guest of the United States Government only while he/she is in
Washington, D.C., three days and two nights. Blair House, the
President's Guest House, is made available as the official
residence while the visitor is in Washington, D.C.
U.S. RESPONSIBILITIES
The Official Party is limited to twelve, including the visitor
and spouse, the Ambassador and spouse in Washington, and
spouses of accompanying official party members. In addition,
other persons such as secretaries, valets, aides, etc. are
included as accompanying members of the party.
The visitor resides at Blair House during the two nights and
theee days normally spent in Washington, D.C., on this visit.
The United States Government provides air transportation for
the Official Party from the location of the visitor within the
United States to Washington, D.C., and from Washington, D.C.,
to the visitor's next stop within the United States.
In addition to the limousines provided by Secret Service for
the visitor and spouse and possibly a limousine(s) provided by
State Department Security for the Foreign Minister, a maximum
of four limousines will be provided by the U.S. Government in
Washington, D.C. A baggage truck as well as a baggage handler
will be provided for all luggage at the Washington, D.C. stop
except that of the traveling press.
-2-
SCHEDULE -- GENERAL FORMAT
DAY ONE
Upon arrival in Washington, D.C., the visitor is
greeted by a Welcoming Committee, and is then flown
from Andrews Air Force Base via U.S. Presidential
helicopters to the Washington Monument Grounds. At
the Washington Monument Grounds, the visitor is
greeted by the Secretary of State and escorted through
an honor cordon. The Secretary of State then escorts
the visitor to Blair House via motorcade.
DAY TWO
The visitor is greeted by the President at the White
House along with an honor cordon.
The President normally hosts a Working Luncheon at
the White House in the visitor's honor following the
substantive meeting. Departure statements are made
at the conclusion of the luncheon.
Additional appointments and visits to places of
interest are arranged as desired for the remainder
of the Washington, D.C. visit. Among the more
frequently desired activities are:
-- Wreath-laying Ceremony at the Tomb of
the Unknown Soldier, Arlington National
Cemetery
-- Meetings with the Congressional
Leadership, Senate Foreign Relations
Committee and House Foreign Affairs
Committee
-- Luncheon and address at the National
Press Club
-- Meetings with specific Cabinet members
-- Meetings with International Organizations
-- Meetings journalists with American and/or foreign
The Ambassador of the visiting country may host a dinner
or a reception honoring the visitor. The Vice President,
Secretary included. of State and other U.S. Government Officials are
-3-
DAY THREE
Substantive meeting and a Luncheon or Dinner are
usually hosted by the Secretary of State - (Size may
vary).
Continue with meetings in town.
Possible reciprocal events, i.e. dinner.
NOTE: A separate schedule for the wife of
the visiting dignitary is arranged by the
Office of Protocol. This will include
appointments and visits to places of interest as
well as a small Tea hosted by the First Lady
at the White House.
Departure from Washington
At the departure, the Farewell Committee is headed by
the Secretary of State at the Washington Monument
Grounds. The dignitary receives a (19 or 21) gun
salute upon departure along with an honor cordon.
OFFICIAL VISIT
TO THE UNITED STATES
DEFINITION
An OFFICIAL VISIT to the United States is made by a Head of
Government (Prime Minister, Chancellor). The invitation is
issued by the President of the United States. The visit
normally lasts seven days (three days and three to four nights
in Washington, D.C. and up to three or four days elsewhere in
the United States) with the visitor arriving the day before the
White House Welcoming Ceremony begins. Blair House, the
President's Guest House, is made available as the official
residence while the visitor is in Washington.
U.S. RESPONSIBILITIES
The Official Party is limited to fourteen, including the
visitor and spouse, the Ambassador and spouse in Washington
and any spouses of accompanying official party members. In
addition, other persons such as aides, secretaries, valets,
etc. are included as accompanying members of the party.
The United States Government provides air transportation for
the Official Party from the place of arrival within the United
States throughout the seven-day period, ending within the
United States. It cannot, however, assume any portion of the
accompanying members' travel or living expenses beyond their
stay at Blair House (except travel which is on the same
aircraft used by the Official Party).
In addition to the limousines provided by Secret Service for
State Department Security for Foreign Minister, a maximum of
the visitor and spouse and possibly a limousine(s) provided by
four staff limousines will be provided during the State Visit.
A visit. baggage truck and handler will be provided throughout the
-2-
The United States Government bears all normal living
hotel expenses incurred on the traveling portion of the
expenses of the Official Party during the visit, including
visit. If the visitor stays in the United States beyond
the seven-day period, the United States does not provide
air transportation nor assume financial responsibility for
ground transportation or living expenses. A Protocol
of the visit.
officer will escort only throughout the official portion
SCHEDULE -- GENERAL FORMAT
-- DAY ONE
Arrival in Washington, D.C. via Presidential
aircraft from U.S. entry. Greeted by Welcoming Committee
headed by Secretary of State. Transit from Andrews Air
Force Base via U.S. Presidential helicopters to the
Washington House/Hotel. Monument grounds. Motorcade to Blair
NOTE: If helicopters are not used, the Party
will motorcade straight to Blair House.
-- DAY TWO
Official Arrival Ceremony at the White House. They
The visitor is greeted by the President at the an
proceed through the Welcoming Committee and are escorted
the onto the Reviewing Platform. Following Arrival Ceremony
President escorts Visitor to Oval Office for Meeting.
The Secretary of State gives a luncheon at the
Department of State. Depending upon the wishes of the
Secretary of State and spouse.
Secretary, this luncheon might be co-hosted by the
Note: Former Secretaries have utilized various
preference. formats. It is Secretary's personal
may follow this luncheon.
A substantive meeting with the Secretary of State
White House. Dress is Black Tie/National Dress.
A State Dinner is given by the President at the
-3-
-- DAY THREE
Additional appointments and visits to places of
interest are arranged as desired for the remainder of the
Washington visit. Among the more frequently desired
activities are:
NOTE: Meeting and/or event held with the
Vice President.
Wreath-laying Ceremony at the Tomb of the Unknown
Soldier, Arlington National Cemetery;
Meetings with the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee;
Luncheon and address at the National Press Club;
Meetings with specific Cabinet members;
Meetings with International Organizations;
Meetings with American and/or foreign journalists;
On the evening of the second day in Washington, the
Ambassador and/or Head of State of the visiting
country may host a dinner or a reception honoring
the Vice President or Secretary of State the visit.
-- DAY FOUR
The departure ceremony takes place at the Washing-
ington Monument. The Secretary escorts the
Dignitary through the Farewell Committee and the
honor cordon and bids farewell.
Visits to other places in the United States for up
to three to four days are arranged as desired.
On the final day in the country, the visitor will
choosing. be taken to the point of departure of their
NOTE: A separate schedule for the wife of the
visiting dignitary is arranged by
the Office of Protocol. This will
include appointments and visits to places
of interest as well as a small tea hosted
by the First Lady at the White House.
STATE VISIT
TO THE UNITED STATES
DEFINITION
A STATE VISIT to the United States can only be made by a Chief
of State (President, reigning monarch, or ruler). The
invitation is issued by the President of the United States. A
State Visit is normally limited to a Chief of State visiting
for the first time during a particular U.S. Administration.
The visit normally lasts seven days (three days and three to
four nights in Washington, D.C. and up to three or four days
elsewhere in the United States) with the visitor arriving the
day before the White House Welcoming Ceremony begins. Blair
House, the President's Guest House, is made available as the
official residence while the visitor is in Washington.
U.S. RESPONSIBILITIES
The Official Party is limited to fourteen, including the
visitor and spouse, the Ambassador and spouse in Washington,
and any spouses of accompanying official party members. In
addition, other persons such as aides, secretaries, valets,
etc. are included as accompanying members of the party.
The United States Government provides air transportation for
the Official Party from the place of arrival within the United
States throughout the seven-day period, ending within the
United States. It cannot, however, assume any portion of the
accompanying members' travel or living expenses beyond their
stay at Blair House (except travel which is on the same
aircraft used by the Official Party).
In addition to the limousines provided by Secret Service for
the visitor and spouse and possibly a limousine (s) provided by
State Department Security for Foreign Minister, a maximum of
four staff limousines will be provided during the State Visit.
A visit. baggage truck and handler will be provided throughout the
-2-
The United States Government bears all normal living
hotel expenses incurred on the traveling portion of the
expenses of the Official Party during the visit, including
visit. If the visitor stays in the United States beyond
the seven-day period, the United States does not provide
air transportation nor assume financial responsibility for
ground transportation or living expenses. A Protocol
officer will escort only throughout the official portion
of the visit.
SCHEDULE -- GENERAL FORMAT
-- DAY ONE
Arrival in Washington, D.C. via Presidential
aircraft from U.S. entry. Greeted by Welcoming Committee
headed by Secretary of State. Transit from Andrews Air
Force Base via U.S. Presidential helicopters to the
House/Hotel. Washington Monument grounds. Motorcade to Blair
NOTE: If helicopters are not used, the Party
will motorcade straight to Blair House.
-- DAY TWO
The visitor is greeted by the President at the an
Official Arrival Ceremony at the White House. They
proceed through the Welcoming Committee and are escorted
the President escorts Visitor to Oval Office for Meeting.
onto the Reviewing Platform. Following Arrival Ceremony
The Secretary of State gives a luncheon at the
Department of State. Depending upon the wishes of the
Secretary of State and spouse.
Secretary, this luncheon might be co-hosted by the
Note: Former Secretaries have utilized various
preference. formats. It is Secretary's personal
may follow this luncheon.
A substantive meeting with the Secretary of State
White House. Dress is Black Tie/National Dress.
A State Dinner is given by the President at the
STATE
VISIT
-3-
-- DAY THREE
Additional appointments and visits to places of
interest are arranged as desired for the remainder of the
Washington visit. Among the more frequently desired
activities are:
NOTE: Meeting and/or event held with the
Vice President.
Wreath-laying Ceremony at the Tomb of the Unknown
Soldier, Arlington National Cemetery;
Meetings with the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee;
Luncheon and address at the National Press Club;
Meetings with specific Cabinet members;
Meetings with International Organizations;
Meetings with American and/or foreign journalists;
On the evening of the second day in Washington, the
Ambassador and/or Head of State of the visiting
country may host a dinner or a reception honoring
the Vice President or Secretary of State the visit.
-- DAY FOUR
The departure ceremony takes place at the Washing-
ington Monument. The Secretary escorts the
Dignitary through the Farewell Committee and the
honor cordon and bids farewell.
Visits to other places in the United States for up
to three to four days are arranged as desired.
On the final day in the country, the visitor will
be taken to the point of departure of their
choosing.
NOTE: A separate schedule for the wife of the
visiting dignitary is arranged by
the Office of Protocol. This will
include appointments and visits to places
of interest as well as a small tea hosted
by the First Lady at the White House.
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
January 25, 1990
PRESS CONFERENCE BY THE PRESIDENT
The Briefing Room
3:24 P.M. EST
MR. PRESIDENT: Two subjects I'd like to address myself
to. First, I want to acknowledge the vote in the Senate upholding my
veto this afternoon and reaffirming our commitment to Chinese
students in this country, as well as the goal of improving relations
with China. No Chinese student in this country is going to be sent
back against his or her will. And we will continue to urge the
People's Republic of China to recognize the human rights of its
citizens, to participate in the affairs of the world community.
And I do want to express my personal thanks to the
leadership of the Republican Party in the Senate -- Senator Dole,
Senator Simpson -- who lead this effort with courage and
determination. And a special thanks to all those members who voted
for the values of justice and human freedom that I believe were at
stake in this question.
Secondly, this morning I called President Endara of
Panama to assure him of our continuing support of his efforts to
establish democracy in Panama. Part of this effort involves the
establishment of a healthy economy. And I'm deeply impressed with his
commitment to reform Panama's economy. And based on this commitment
and the report I received from Larry Eagleburger and John Robson,
with us here, I informed President Endara that we'd arrived at an
economic assistance package to help assist Panama in its economic
recovery.
Our plan, valued at about $1 million, includes $500
million in humanitarian assistance for housing, emergency public
works, business assistance, loans, guarantees and export
opportunities; and then $500 million in addition assistance package
for balance of payment support, public investment and economic
restructuring.
The Vice President will review the details of this plan
with President Endara on his visit to Panama. We're going to work
closely with the Congress on this package to ensure its prompt
implimentation. The economic challenges that Panama faces are great,
but we will work with the people to build a prosperous, democratic
nation.
I've just met again with Secretaries Robson and
Eagleburger, and they believe, given the history in Panama on the
business side, that this economic assistance can indeed result in
short-run in a vastly improved economic situation.
2
Mr. President, isn't it about time that you told the
American people what were the results of two secret missions to
China, whether you got any kind of promise from Beijing for loosening
up and becoming a more tolerant society, and will this victory lead
you to trying to lift the sanctions against China?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think I addressed myself to that
yesterday, but let me repeat, I was very pleased at their lifting of
martial law; I was very pleased at the release of 573 people from
MORE
- 2 -
jail in a kind of an amnesty. I've said that these weren't all the
steps that need to be taken. I'm very pleased that they've stopped
harassing the United States Mission there, our Embassy in Beijing.
I'm very pleased that they lightened up on the areas where I think
we can really move things forward, and that is the Peace Corps and
the Fulbright exchanges.
So this was all part of the debate on the Hill. And I
must say that I think that -- the fact that they had made those moves
carried some weight with some of the senators.
Q
Is that the promise that you were given? I mean,
they say now that martial law is really --
THE PRESIDENT: There were no promises I'm looking for
action, not words.
Q Well, how about the sanctions?
THE PRESIDENT: That's the third question, and -- what
sanctions? Which part of the sanctions?
Q Military and technical assistance and so forth.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, we're looking at the whole
performance scale. And I expect they are, too. But I'm very, very
pleased with the results on the Hill today.
Q Mr. President, out of 535 members of Congress, 62
supported you on this veto. Do you view that as any kind of overall
-- do you view that as a mandate for your policies?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes. Because you've got to give
disproportionate weight to how the Executive Branch feels. We're an
equal branch. So you add to that the support on the Hill; we come
out more than equal.
Q
And does it give you any support for new initiatives
toward China?
THE PRESIDENT: It gives me -- the thing I like about it,
given the mournful predictions of some a couple of weeks ago, is that
it gives me the confidence that I'm going to go forward the way I
think is correct here. And I've had a lot of chance to talk to
people that voted with us and some that didn't, and I understand
their sensitivities. And I VOW to do a better job of informing them
as these things develop as to what it is we're intending. But I'm
very, very pleased with the result, for reasons that I'm sure
everybody out here can understand.
Q
Mr. President, back to the Chinese students for a
moment. Does your commitment that no Chinese student would be sent
back against his or her will -- does that run absolutely, or is that
something that will run until such time as you feel that China has
changed its ways in some way that meets your approval?
THE PRESIDENT: Against his or her will --
Q
Ever?
THE PRESIDENT: -- is the controlling statement, yes.
Q
Mr. President, on the aid to Panama, some
assessments say $1 billion is only a fraction of what it will need to
restore the effects down there. What is your assessment, and what
are people saying? Is this the first step toward what?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I'm basing my judgment on what
President Endara said and on the recommendations of the economic
mission that went there. And President Endara seemed very pleased
with this. I said to him, if there is additional categories where we
can -- in which we can be helpful, please let me know. But I think
MORE
- 3 -
he was very pleased and I think both Larry and John feel that it is a
very good step. Whether it's the last step or not, I don't know.
We've got to see how that private sector responds and how the
economic recovery goes forward. But I wouldn't say this is the end
of the road in terms of what we can do to help them.
Q
But is there a full assessment of what the total
cost will be?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think they feel that this is --
let's go here, see what happens, and then take another look. Some
may come up with higher figures, but this is what we think is a good
and full program to give them the help they need right now.
Q
Mr. President, have you been personally briefed on
the exact number of people left homeless as a result of the U.S.
invasion of Panama? And when specifically, sir, can they expect to
get new homes to replace those destroyed?
THE PRESIDENT: I think these programs will give instant
-- or as close to instant relief as we can hope for here. In fact,
there's a provision -- I'd like to ask Larry and John to take a
couple of questions after I bail out on this that will address
themselves in more specificity, because I don't have the exact number
there. But I would like to help as best I can with the
reconstruction.
Q
I know you're talking about foreign policy, but may
I ask you a drug question since you were talking about that today,
though?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, sir.
Q
Given the fact that in your Inaugural Address you
talked about -- you promised to stop the scourge of drugs, and given
the fact that today you told the newspaper publishers that drugs was
at the top of your agenda, is this going to be the primary test for
your administration in its first four years at least, the primary
domestic test -- assuming the economy doesn't fall apart? Is this
the big one?
THE PRESIDENT: I think it's the big one, and I think
it's the test not for the administration, but for every community in
the country, every state, every local government, for the people.
And somebody asked me, if you had to set goals -- changes in the
education system or -- but where could you most readily hope to see
results? I would say in the antinarcotics fight. I think it's
really that kind of priority.
Q
Mr. President, going back to China. You gave us an
accounting of why General Scowcroft went in December, but I wonder if
I could ask you to go back to July. Could you give us an accounting
of that trip? What happened? What did you learn? Why did you send
him then?
THE PRESIDENT: To see -- to make clear to the Chinese
leadership that the relationship is important, but that it could not
go forward until certain changes had taken place. And that, in sum,
was what it was about.
Q
Was it your initiative, or theirs?
THE PRESIDENT: Mine. Mine, I should say.
Q
Back to the override vote. Does this suggest to
you, your victory today, that if you can win here you can win on
anything with Congress?
THE PRESIDENT: No, because I think we had a very good
case here. If I took a case up there that wasn't any good, why, I'd
probably get beat. But this one I think people were willing to
listen -- some that had been positioned opposed to it -- opposed to
MORE
- 4 -
my position. And I think when they heard the full argument, I think
they decided, well, we should support the President on this one.
Q Could you extrapolate a little bit on that, Mr.
President? Given that you've pointed out repeatedly that you have
done administratively what Congress ought to do legislatively, why
was it so important to win this vote?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I said yesterday, I mean, for
several reasons. One reason: I think there was a political
ingredient in it, and nobody likes to get pounded on that. And also,
I think from a foreign policy standpoint, I think it's better to do
it this way. I think there's a trust factor that hopefully will
result in changes that are satisfactory to the American people and to
me -- a trust factor in the administration. And I hope that I can
use that, having won this now, to further the kinds of things that I
think will help move China forward.
You see, I think that the unilateral decision by
President Nixon to send Kissinger on a secret mission to establish
contact in days when they were far darker in China's U.S. relations
was a good decision. And I think the decisions I've made are good
decisions. I can understand the controversy and I can understand why
there wasn't a unanimous endorsement. But I view it as a very good
step. I will pledge right here to work with the Congress. I love
the way the debate ended with both Senator Mitchell and Dole saluting
each other for the way in which the matter was discussed. And I
think that's a good signal for the political fights that may lie
ahead.
Q
If I could follow up on David's question. You said
that Mr. Scowcroft's trip in July, the Chinese were told certain
things had to happen for the relationship to go forward. Can you
elaborate on this things and tell us if they've happened?
THE PRESIDENT: No, because I think that we've seen China
take certain steps. In diplomacy, I don't think you make progress by
throwing down a list of things telling somebody else how to behave.
I do think you adhere to your own principles. And I think sometimes
you have to undertake the kind of diplomacy that I engaged in here to
reiterate principles and to explain the severity of problems to
people. But if you do it publicly all the time and you do it so
you're painting somebody into a corner, I don't think you get
results. And that's why I did what I've done.
Q
Is the status of Mr. Fang one of those things that
needs to be resolved? And can you give us any information on that?
THE PRESIDENT: It certainly is a matter that I would
like to see resolved.
Q
Mr. President, on capital gains you've pointed out
on several occasions that because of parliamentary rules you've been
thwarted. You've asked that Congress give the majority the right to
exercise their will by passing capital gains. Now, in this case, you
technically won on this veto because of parliamentary rules. But the
vast majority voted against you on this. Don't you believe that that
is, in fact, a repudiation of your Chinese policy?
THE PRESIDENT: No, I don't 22C = parallel. This is
Executive Branch. You are equal with the Legislative Branch. The
whole ball game is entitled to have the veto process. Part of the
election is about the veto process. It's not a question of whether
-- but when you have a majority of senators up there doing one thing,
that's fine, provided the President agrees with it. But that's what
I'm saying.
Q
But I'm talking specifically about what Congress did
over the last couple of days.
THE PRESIDENT: Surprised you, didn't it?
MORE
- 5 -
Q
The majority of congressmen in both the House and
the Senate voted against you on this issue. Do you believe that
that's a repudiation by Congress of your Chinese policy?
THE PRESIDENT: No. They're entitled to do their thing,
and the Executive's entitled to do its own thing. And it worked.
And we're going to stay right on track. And I think the process
worked very well. I don't view it as a repudiation at all.
Q
Mr. President, I understand that Transportation
Secretary Skinner was among those making calls on this vote.
THE PRESIDENT: I hope so.
Q
Well, that suggests a little pork barrel persuasion
as well. Was there something more than just the pure --
THE PRESIDENT: Highways in China -- what are you talking
about?
Q
Well, I mean, was it just the pure merits of the
case that won the day, or was it win one for the --
THE PRESIDENT: I think there were some politics in it.
I think there was politics in it.
Q
Both sides?
Q
On both sides?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, both sides.
Q
That you used?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes -- because some of them said, look,
let's stand with the President. Some that may have had a slight
difference of emphasis on our side; and clearly there was plenty on
the other side when you don't see one single vote come across the
aisle not one. Not one.
Q
Did you make specific promises to anyone on help on
any other issue?
THE PRESIDENT: No.
Q
Did you play hardball?
THE PRESIDENT: Softball great, big, fat one coming
over the plate. Excuse me.
Q
You spoke of a trust factor. I wonder if I can
apply that to the American people, sir. What can you say to convince
the people that the missions to China weren't secret simply to avoid
the overwhelming public opposition to them?
THE PRESIDENT: I say I think what I'm doing is correct,
and I say I think I was elected to do in foreign policy what I think
was correct. And you have the checks and balances of the Congress.
They had a shot to say that it wasn't correct in this instance. And
so I say that I feel encouraged that the process worked out this way,
and I point back to the original relationship with China. And I
don't believe you would have ever had it if there hadn't been some
secret diplomacy.
Q
If I could ask the question again, sir --
THE PRESIDENT: You might. You'll get the same answer
if you ask the same question.
Q
Were the missions not kept secret to avoid the
overwhelming public opposition to them?
MORE
- 6 -
THE PRESIDENT: No. The missions were kept secret
because I believe this is the best way in dealing with China to
effect change positive change.
Q
Mr. President, as you're aware, China issued an
angry statement overnight over the House action yesterday, referring
to their vote as interference in China's affairs. You warned
yesterday about China's action if your veto was not sustained. What
I don't understand is why China would -- since you've promised to do
the same things administratively that the Pelosi bill would have
done, why China would regard that as interference, but you doing it
they wouldn't?
THE PRESIDENT: I think they would see it as a further
public slap at a time when they feel some steps have been taken that
are positive. And I think that is probably what -- but let there be
no mistake about it -- I'm sure they're not very happy with my
Executive Order. I mean, they're entitled to their view, and we're
entitled to ours. And I have a mandate to protect these students,
and China, as you know, has a very different view on it. But I think
that's the only thing I can think of.
Q
Let me ask on a different topic, on the Middle East.
You've had three press conferences in two days now, and there's been
no questions at all about the Middle East. Is this a signal that
your administration and that the American public as a whole is
disgusted with the slow pace of events toward the peace process?
THE PRESIDENT: No, because I don't write the questions
for the press conference. I mean, I can't help it if I had no
questions. But I don't think anything in the status quo should be
interpreted as a lack of interest in trying to be helpful on the
talks going, if that's what you mean. In fact, there is discussion
going on. We had discussions with our most recent visitor, President
Saleh. I've just concluded a meeting with Senator Specter, who is
just back from Syria and from Iraq, and there's a lot going on. I
wish I could tell you I felt that there was demonstrable progress.
But, no, please don't assume because I have addressed myself in the
statements to the China question and the question of Panama or the
question of our domestic agenda, that we have lost interest in trying
to be a catalyst in the Middle East.
α
Do you think one side is being more recalcitrant
than the other?
THE PRESIDENT: I don't think it would be helpful to
quantify recalcitrance. I think what we ought to do is what Jim
Baker is trying to do right now, and that is to facilitate the talks
to get them started.
Q
Mr. President, with this victory in the Senate, do
you anticipate sending General Scowcroft or perhaps some other envoy
back to China to talk again, perhaps in open this time?
THE PRESIDENT: I'm not sure Scowcroft and Eagleburger
want any more grief like this. (Laughter.) There are no plans to do
-- let me be very clear. This -- again, and I'm not dodging your
question. One, there are no plans for anything of that nature.
Secondly, this was my idea, for good or for bad. And these are
seasoned diplomats and seasoned people in national security, and we
talk about these matters. And when the President makes a decision,
why, they do what I suggest here. And so I don't want to be doing
anything other than expressing total confidence in them and in their
mission. And I know it's been controversial.
But I'm not somebody that's always looking for a way to
do something in secret. When I see, though, back to the question I
was asked, that in my judgment a quiet conversation might lead to
progress, I hope I will continue to feel I have the flexibility to
pursue such conversation.
Q
Mr. President, when you sent your memorandum of
MORE
- 7 -
disapproval on the China students bill, you characterized it as a
pocket veto and said that the constitutional provision precluded it
becoming law. Yet, we haven't heard you object to the fact that the
Congress took the vote to override. Have you changed your mind on
that?
THE PRESIDENT: I need a lawyer on that one. I don't --
Q
I'd certainly like to follow it up somehow.
THE PRESIDENT: I think you should get --
Q You need a lawyer.
THE PRESIDENT: I really do. (Laughter.) It's
technical, and I can't --
Q
Some people said that by sending the message back,
you undid your pocket veto and actually gave them a veto to override.
But I don't think the White House accepts that, and I'd certainly
like to get an answer to it.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, let me get you an answer, because
we're not seeking to do some clever parliamentary maneuver to have
people have to vote on this question when I would rather have seen
the matter lie dormant.
Q
You indicated in the beginning of your statement
that you feel you do have a mandate now on this China policy. A lot
of people have criticized it as a secret policy. You also indicated
that perhaps you might do more to keep Congress informed. Why not
keep them informed of these secret missions, and what do you plan to
do in terms of keeping them informed?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think we do. We bend over
backwards to keep people informed in the Congress. And I think once
in a while there is something that is done quietly, and then when it
is proper, why, we'll give a thorough and full briefing. And I think
in this one, when this matter was disclosed by us, we immediately
briefed Congress on what it was we had intended to do, why we did it.
And so I don't think there's any real lack of consultation. In fact,
I pride myself on the fact that we have had outstanding consultation.
And I've had these leaders down here over and over again --
bipartisan -- and I'm going to continue to do that.
Q The July trip, Mr. President, it was six months
before Congress found out about it.
THE PRESIDENT: That's right.
Q
Why not inform the people?
THE PRESIDENT: Because we were working on some
initiatives and in my judgment it was better that it be quiet. And
I've cited some examples in history, particularly the China trip
the opening to China that I think was best served by the way it was
done.
O
Mr. President, as you analyze the outcome today and
the vote itself, how much of it was a vote on the Chinese student
issue, and how much of it do you perceive to be a vote on your
overall approach to China?
THE PRESIDENT: or on the political side -- I don't know.
I don't know how you measure it. But I do think this: As I had an
opportunity to discuss it with individuals, and as our team did, I
think there was much more understanding of the merits than had been
granted originally, and I think we'd all agree -- everybody here --
that a couple of weeks ago there was just -- it just was kind of
written off as -- and getting pounded on the merits as well as on the
politics. So the consultations and the discussions to try to get
support for this I think have increased understanding even by those
MORE
- 8 -
that didn't vote for me. At least I think they understand that there
were some merits to what I was trying to do. They may have disagreed
with it. Some may have agreed with what is the thrust of some of
these questions, on the secrecy question. Some may have felt that
legislation is better than the Executive Branch authority doing it.
But I think I was given the benefit of the doubt by some in terms of
knowledge of the importance of a relationship with China. I think
I've hopefully dissuaded some in terms of some of the propaganda on
the other side that I didn't care about human rights.
So it was an interesting development here -- taking a
project that many had considered extraordinarily difficult and then
seeing it resolve itself in this way. But there's no intention on my
part to crow about it. I mean, it was a very close vote, and it
worked out better than many had felt it would. And now, we've got to
go forward. Tomorrow, it's something else. I'm not going to live
there on this thing forever.
Q
If I may follow -- was there not a broader issue in
regard to the China policy here than just the situation with the
students?
THE PRESIDENT: I'm not sure --
Q
Was this not a congressional mandate or a Senate
mandate on the way you've handled the overall China policy more than
just the student issue?
THE PRESIDENT: Some of it was. Some of it was
political, some of it was -- we'd already accomplished by Executive
Order what the Pelosi bill was going to do, so some of it was a
feeling that maybe it would be better to lock it in on legislation;
some of it was they wanted to make a statement. There's a lot of
reasons -- you have to just ask those who voted as they did.
Q
Mr. President, a lot of the emotion over your China
policy had to do with the famous Scowcroft toast on videotape. It
angered a lot of people to see him toasting people responsible for
the Tiananmen Square massacre. Will you say that at least that part
of it was a mistake, that if --
THE PRESIDENT: No, because when you go to China, that is
-- I don't know of anybody that's been there that doesn't engage in
that activity. And if you read the full context of what was said, I
think it was a very unfair shot. But I agree with you; some people
used that as something that was outrageous. But they ought to go
over to China and just understand how it works.
Q If it had not been televised, do you think the
public reaction to -- if people had only known that he went over
there and that he had talks, do you think the public reaction would
have been different than it was when they saw him toasting on
television?
THE PRESIDENT: No, I think the people that are outraged
by it and expressed themselves were concerned about my whole approach
to it -- I think. But I can say that that -- I think that it may
have affected one or two. I don't really know the answer to that
one.
Q
Back to Panama, sir. The election last May was the
one that never really resulted in a full count because of General
Noriega, yet that's the same election on which the Endara government
is basing its legitimacy. Is it time, sir, for another election in
Panama?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think, fortunately, the Endara
government has been endorsed by the electoral commission -- they were
kind of diverted from their normal course of business by Mr. Noriega
a while back. But I don't -- I think that's a matter for the
Panamanians to decide. I think it would be a little bit outrageous
for us to come charging in and tell them when they ought to have an
MORE
- 9 -
election.
Q But what is your opinion on it?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I'm not going to have an opinion.
I want this to be the Panamanian system. The emphasis from now on
ought to be Panama's democracy, Panama determination, let Panama
figure out -- and then we'll try to help or, if they ask for
criticism or suggestions, fine. But I don't want to be appearing
that we are trying to run the new democracy in Panama from up here.
That would be the worst thing we could do.
Q
On another topic, several key Democratic senators
say they no longer they don't believe President Cristiani has
control of the military any longer. What is your response to that?
They are also drafting legislation which would kill future military
aid. Do you think you will be as successful in defeating that
package as you were today?
THE PRESIDENT: I hope so because Cristiani is trying
hard. And I think there is some evidence that he doesn't control all
his military -- the very fact he's trying to bring some to justice
who at least have been accused of wrong-doing demonstrates that. But
the man was elected, certifiably-free elections. He is trying very
hard. He has taken some extraordinarily courageous and tough steps.
And he has my full support.
Q
My question is about Mexico and Venezuela and other
countries in South America that have been offended by the invasion in
Panama.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
Q
I wonder if you have spoken with their leaders and
used some of your personal diplomacy to convince them that you didn't
intend any and won't be invading any other countries anytime soon.
(Laughter.)
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I haven't given them my invasion
list, but I have -- (laughter) -- no, but seriously, it's a very
important question diplomatically; it's a good question. And I --
first place, as of today, because of what's happened since the
fighting began, things are better. Some of it may be just that time
heals. Secondly, I think that they have been informed some by me,
mail, phone calls when these actions took place, and our State
Department and our representatives as to what our intention was, what
the cause was, what we're doing. They've seen a lot of forces come
out now, which I think is helpful. There's a history. And anytime
you undertake an engagement like I authorized, you've got to assess
what the down side is because of the history.
But, Jessica, I am pleased with where we are now. And I
have not engaged in the last week or so in a lot of diplomatic
activity with my friends, but I've sent enough communications that I
think they know what my heartbeat is on this and I think they -- I
hope now, when they saw what happened with the Panamanian people,
that that made a profound impression on them. And they've seen
Endara go forward and they ve seen the stamp of approval given to his
democracy and they see that now, as of today, that we're determined
to help not just with rhetoric, but with a means of recovery. So
things are better. And I think, given the action that I authorized,
in pretty good shape. I'm not suggesting I have no diplomacy ahead.
Q
Mr. President, it was a surprise victory to start
the year. Will this transfer to other issues, and is this what
someone once called "big Mo,' momentum starting off 1990?
(Laughter.)
THE PRESIDENT: Listen, I learned a lesson not to talk
about that. And I learned it the hard way took it right on the
chin. And I'm coming in here in the spirit of cooperation. And
excuse me if the adrenaline flew one or two of the questions because
MORE
- 10 -
things didn't look too bright a little while back. But no, there's
no point in -- this is too serious a business, especially as it
relates to this China policy. And so I'm not in a mode of talking
about momentum or something of that nature.
I do think because of the way it worked out it's going to
be helpful in reaching accommodation in the Senate and in the House
on certain of our objectives. By that I mean I offer out that hand
of cooperation, but it is a two-way street. I simply cannot accept
legislation that is opposed to principles I believe in.
So I don't know where it will fall out, but there is --
and I promise you, I don't come in here with some sense of gloating
or anything of that nature at all. It was too tough a vote for a lot
of my friends on both sides of the aisle.
Ellen, last one.
2
Mr. President, in announcing $1 billion for Panama,
that's an awful lot of money. So what countries are going to get
less money as a result of our generosity to Panama?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, there will be offsets and we will,
at the appropriate time, which is fairly soon, tell the Congress
where we think those offsets should come from. But let me reiterate
my philosophical approval for the Bob Dole position, which is to give
the President more flexibility on this concept of earmarking.
I've boycotted the back benches, so we're going to end
with this one right here.
Q
Mr. President, do you agree with the NAACP and other
organizations that there is a rising tide of racism in this country?
THE PRESIDENT: I had a long talk with some of the
executives of the NAACP the other day, and they expressed to me their
concerns. And I share their concerns. But whether it -- I like to
think that there isn't a rising tide. I think that there are some
very ugly incidents. And if I can use this platform, the White
House, to speak out against that bigotry and against that ugliness,
perhaps it will help. But I will tell you that several of those
leaders felt that there was a growing pattern of racism, and as your
question said, a rising tide. I don't know that I agree with it, but
I do agree there is some very ugly incidents lately, and we all ought
to do what we can to make clear that is not the American way.
Thank you, I really do have to go. Thank you. You guys
have been stiffed, but I'll get you next time, I promise.
END
3:57 P.M. EST
BEYOND,
CONTAINMENT
Selected Speeches by President George Bush
on Europe and East-West Relations
April 17 - June 2, 1989
The White House
I
n this series of speeches, President
George Bush projects a policy that seeks to move beyond containment-to
integrate the Soviet Union into the community of nations.
It is a policy based on the strength and vitality of the Atlantic Alliance, which
has brought Europe its longest period of uninterrupted peace in the modern age.
The Alliance's unity and the force of its democratic foundations have opened up
new possibilities-of a less militarized Europe, of a stronger and more united
Western Europe, of a Europe whole and free and at peace with itself.
President Bush articulates policies and proposes concrete initiatives aimed
at helping end the division of Europe. From proposals for more comprehensive
and faster negotiated cuts in conventional arms to initiatives aimed at supporting
the growth of democracy in Eastern Europe, they have the same purpose: to
promote a reconciliation based on shared values, where East joins West in a
commonwealth of free nations.
Table of Contents
Remarks to Citizens of Hamtramck
Hamtramck, Michigan
April 17, 1989
2
Remarks at the Texas A&M University
Commencement Ceremony
College Station, Texas
May 12, 1989
7
Remarks at the Boston University
Commencement Ceremony
Boston, Massachusetts
May 21, 1989
12
Remarks at the U.S. Coast Guard Academy
Graduation Ceremony
New London, Connecticut
May 24, 1989
16
Remarks Upon Departure for Europe
Andrews Air Force Base, Maryland
May 26, 1989
21
Remarks at Rheingoldhalle
Mainz, Federal Republic of Germany
May 31, 1989
23
Remarks Upon Arrival at Pease Air Force Base
Portsmouth, New Hampshire
June 2, 1989
31
REMARKS TO CITIZENS OF HAMTRAMCK
Hamtramck, Michigan
April 17, 1989
I
want to address, at this important gathering, the health and
prosperity of a whole nation: the proud people of Poland. You know, we
Americans are not mildly sympathetic spectators of events in Poland.
We are bound to Poland by a very special bond: a bond of blood, of
culture and shared values. And so, it is only natural that as dramatic
change comes to Poland we share the aspirations and excitement of the
Polish people.
Old Ideas and New Thinking
In my Inaugural Address, I spoke of the new breeze of freedom gaining
strength around the world. "In man's heart," I said, "if not in fact, the day
of the dictator is over. The totalitarian era is passing, its old ideas
blown away like leaves from an ancient lifeless tree."
I spoke of the spreading recognition that prosperity can only come
from a free market and the creative genius of individuals. I spoke of the
new potency of democratic ideals: of free speech, free elections and the
exercise of free will. We should not be surprised that the ideals of
democracy are returning with renewed force in Europe, the homeland
2
of philosophers of freedom, whose ideals have been so fully realized in
our great United States of America. Victor Hugo said: "An invasion of
armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come." My friends,
liberty is an idea whose time has come in Eastern Europe, and make no
mistake about it.
For almost half a century, the suppression of freedom in Eastern
Europe, sustained by the military power of the Soviet Union, has kept
nation from nation, neighbor from neighbor. As East and West now
seek to reduce arms, it must not be forgotten that arms are a symptom,
not a source, of tension. The true source of tension is the imposed and
unnatural division of Europe. How can there be stability and security in
Europe and the world as long as nations and peoples are denied the
right to determine their own future, a right explicitly promised by
agreements among the victorious powers at the end of World War II?
How can there be stability and security in Europe as long as nations
which once stood proudly at the front rank of industrial powers are
impoverished by a discredited ideology and stifling authoritarianism? The
United States-and let's be clear on this-has never accepted the
legitimacy of Europe's division. We accept no spheres of influence that
deny the sovereign rights of nations.
Yet the winds of change are shaping a new European destiny.
Western Europe is resurgent, and Eastern Europe is awakening to
yearnings for democracy, independence and prosperity. In the Soviet
Union itself, we are encouraged by the sound of voices long silent and the
sight of the rulers consulting the ruled. We see new thinking in some
aspects of Soviet foreign policy. We are hopeful that these stirrings
presage meaningful, lasting and more far-reaching change. Let no one
doubt the sincerity of the American people and their government in their
desire to see reform succeed inside the Soviet Union. We welcome the
changes that have taken place, and we will continue to encourage greater
recognition of human rights, market incentives and free elections.
East-West Negotiations
East and West are now negotiating on a broad range of issues, from
arms reductions to the environment. But the Cold War began in Eastern
Europe, and if it is to end, it will end in this crucible of world conflict.
And it must end. The American people want to see East and Central
Europe free, prosperous and at peace. With prudence, realism
and patience, we seek to promote the evolution of freedom-the
opportunities sparked by the Helsinki Accords and the deepening East-
West contact. In recent years, we have improved relations with
countries in the region, and in each case, we looked for progress in
international posture and internal practices: in human rights, cultural
openness, emigration issues, opposition to international terror. While we
3
want relations to improve, there are certain acts we will not condone or
accept, behavior that can shift relations in the wrong direction: human
rights abuses, technology theft, and hostile intelligence or foreign
policy actions against us.
Reform
Some regimes are now seeking to win popular legitimacy through
reforms. In Hungary, a new leadership is experimenting with reforms that
may permit a political pluralism that only a few years ago would have
been absolutely unthinkable. And in Poland, on April 5th, Solidarity
leader Lech Walesa and Interior Minister Kiszczak signed agreements
that, if faithfully implemented, will be a watershed in the postwar history
of Eastern Europe.
Under the auspices of the roundtable agreements, the free trade
union Solidarnosc was today-this very day, under those
agreements-Solidarnosa was today formally restored. And the
agreements also provide that a free opposition press will be legalized,
independent political and other free associations will be permitted,
and elections for a new Polish Senate will be held. These agreements
testify to the realism of General Jaruzelski [Chairman of Poland's
Council of State] and his colleagues, and they are inspiring testimony to
the spiritual guidance of the Catholic Church, the indomitable spirit of
the Polish people, and the strength and wisdom of Lech Walesa.
Poland faces, and will continue to face for some time, severe
economic problems. A modern French writer observed that communism
is not another form of economics: It is the death of economics. In
Poland, an economic system crippled by the inefficiencies of central
planning almost proved the death of initiative and enterprise-almost.
But economic reforms can still give free rein to the enterprising impulse
and creative spirit of the great Polish people.
Agenda for Poland
The Polish people understand the magnitude of this challenge.
Democratic forces in Poland have asked for the moral, political and
economic support of the West. And the West will respond. My
administration is completing now a thorough review of our policies
toward Poland and all of Eastern Europe, and I've carefully considered
ways the United States can help Poland. We will not act unconditionally.
We're not going to offer unsound credits. We're not going to offer aid
without requiring sound economic practices in return. We must
remember that Poland still is a member of the Warsaw Pact. I will take
no steps that compromise the security of the West.
The Congress, the Polish-American community... the American
labor movement, our allies and international financial institutions-our
4
allies-all must work in concert if Polish democracy is to take root
anew and sustain itself. We can and must answer this call to freedom. And
it is particularly appropriate here in Hamtramck for me to salute the
members and leaders of the American labor movement for hanging tough
with Solidarity through its darkest days. Labor deserves great credit for
that.
Now the Poles are now taking steps that deserve our active
support. I have decided as your president on specific steps to be taken by
the United States, carefully chosen to recognize the reforms underway
and to encourage reforms yet to come now that Solidarnosc is legal. I will
ask Congress to join me in providing Poland access to our Generalized
System of Preferences, which offers selective tariff relief to beneficiary
countries. We will work with our allies and friends in the Paris Club to
develop sustainable new schedules for Poland to repay its debt, easing a
heavy burden so that a free market can grow. I will also ask Congress to
join me in authorizing the Overseas Private Investment Corporation to
operate in Poland, to the benefit of both Polish and U.S. investors. We
will propose negotiations for a private business agreement with Poland to
encourage cooperation between U.S. firms and Poland's private
businesses. Both sides can benefit. The United States will continue to
consider supporting, on their merits, viable loans to the private sector
by the International Finance Corporation. We believe that the roundtable
agreements clear the way for Poland to be able to work with the
International Monetary Fund on programs that support sound, market-
oriented economic policies. We will encourage business and private
non-profit groups to develop innovative programs to swap Polish debt for
equity in Polish enterprises, and for charitable, humanitarian and
environmental projects. We will support imaginative educational, cultural
and training programs to help liberate the creative energies of the
Polish people.
When I visited Poland in September of 1987, I was then vice
president, and told Chairman Jaruzelski and Lech Walesa that the
American people and government would respond quickly and
imaginatively to significant internal reform of the kind that we now see.
Both of them valued that assurance. So, it is especially gratifying for me
today to witness the changes now taking place in Poland and to announce
these important changes in U.S. policy. The United States of America
keeps its promises.
If Poland's experiment succeeds, other countries may follow.
While we must still differentiate among the nations of Eastern Europe,
Poland offers two lessons for all. First, there can be no progress without
significant political and economic liberalization. Second, help from the
West will come in concert with liberalization. Our friends and European
allies share this philosophy.
5
Vision of Freedom
The West can now be bold in proposing a vision of the European future.
We dream of the day when there will be no barriers to the free movement
of peoples, goods and ideas. We dream of the day when Eastern
European peoples will be free to choose their system of government and
to vote for the party of their choice in regular, free, contested elections.
We dream of the day when Eastern European countries will be free to
choose their own peaceful course in the world, including closer ties
with Western Europe. And we envision an Eastern Europe in which the
Soviet Union has renounced military intervention as an instrument of
its policy-on any pretext. We share an unwavering conviction that one
day all the peoples of Europe will live in freedom. And make no mistake
about that.
Next month, at a summit of the North Atlantic Alliance, I will meet
with the leaders of the Western democracies. The leaders of the Western
democracies will discuss these concerns. These are not bilateral issues
just between the United States and the Soviet Union. They are, rather, the
concern of all the Western allies, calling for common approaches. The
Soviet Union should understand, in turn, that a free, democratic Eastern
Europe as we envision it would threaten no one and no country. Such
an evolution would imply and reinforce the further improvement of East-
West relations in all dimensions-arms reductions, political relations,
trade-in ways that enhance the safety and well-being of all of Europe.
There is no other way.
What has brought us to this opening? The unity and strength of
the democracies, yes, and something else: the bold, new thinking in the
Soviet Union, the innate desire for freedom in the hearts of all men. We
will not waver in our dedication to freedom now. If we're wise, united and
ready to seize the moment, we will be remembered as the generation
that made all Europe free.
Two centuries ago, a Polish patriot, Thaddeus Kosciuszko, came to
these American shores to stand for freedom. Let us honor and remember
this hero of our own struggle for freedom by extending our hand to
those who work the shipyards of Gdansk and walk the cobbled streets of
Warsaw. Let us recall the words of the Poles who struggled for
independence: "For your freedom and ours." Let us support the peaceful
evolution of democracy in Poland. The cause of liberty knows no limits;
the friends of freedom, no borders.
6
REMARKS AT THE TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY
COMMENCEMENT CEREMONY
College Station, Texas
May 12, 1989
W
are reminded that no generation can escape history.
Parents, we share a fervent desire for our children, and their children, to
know a better world, a safer world. Students, your parents and
grandparents have lived through a world war and helped America to
rebuild the world. They witnessed the drama of postwar nations
divided by Soviet subversion and force, but sustained by an Allied
response most vividly seen in the Berlin Airlift.
And today I would like to use this joyous and solemn occasion to
speak to you and to the rest of the country about our relations with the
Soviet Union
Containment-and Beyond
Wise men-Truman and Eisenhower; Vandenberg and Rayburn;
Marshall, Acheson and Kennan-crafted the strategy of containment.
They believed that the Soviet Union, denied the easy course of
expansion, would turn inward and address the contradictions of its
inefficient, repressive and inhumane system. And they were right. The
Soviet Union is now publicly facing this hard reality.
Containment worked. Containment worked because our
democratic principles and institutions and values are sound and always
have been. It worked because our alliances were, and are, strong and
because the superiority of free societies and free markets over stagnant
socialism is undeniable.
7
We are approaching the conclusion of an historic postwar
struggle between two visions: one of tyranny and conflict, and one of
democracy and freedom. The review of U.S.-Soviet relations that my
administration has just completed outlines a new path toward
resolving this struggle.
Our goal is bold, more ambitious than any of my predecessors
could have thought possible. Our review indicates that 40 years of
perseverance have brought us a precious opportunity, and now it is
time to move beyond containment to a new policy for the 1990s, one that
recognizes the full scope of change taking place around the world and
in the Soviet Union itself. In sum, the United States now has as its goal
much more than simply containing Soviet expansionism. We seek the
integration of the Soviet Union into the community of nations. And
as the Soviet Union itself moves toward greater openness and
democratization, as they meet the challenge of responsible international
behavior, we will match their steps with steps of our own. Ultimately,
our objective is to welcome the Soviet Union back into the world order.
New Thinking
The Soviet Union says that it seeks to make peace with the world and
criticizes its own postwar policies. These are words that we can only
applaud. But a new relationship cannot be simply declared by Moscow
or bestowed by others; it must be earned. It must be earned because
promises are never enough. The Soviet Union has promised a more
cooperative relationship before, only to reverse course and return to
militarism. Soviet foreign policy has been almost seasonal: warmth
before cold, thaw before freeze. We seek a friendship that knows no
season of suspicion, no chill of distrust.
We hope perestroika is pointing the Soviet Union to a break with the
cycles of the past-a definitive break. Who would have thought we would
see the deliberations of the Central Committee on the front page of
Pravda, or dissident Andrei Sakharov seated near the councils of power?
Who would have imagined a Soviet leader who canvasses the sidewalks
of Moscow and also Washington, D.C.? These are hopeful, indeed,
remarkable signs. Let no one doubt our sincere desire to see perestroika,
this reform, continue and succeed. But the national security of America
and our allies is not predicated on hope. It must be based on deeds.
We look for enduring, ingrained, economic and political change.
While we hope to move beyond containment, we are only at the
beginning of our new path. Many dangers and uncertainties are ahead. We
must not forget that the Soviet Union has acquired awesome military
capabilities. That was a fact of life for my predecessors, and that's always
been a fact of life for our allies. And that is a fact of life for me today, as
President of the United States.
8
As we seek peace, we must also remain strong. The purpose of our
military might is not to pressure a weak Soviet economy or to seek
military superiority. It is to deter war. It is to defend ourselves and our
allies, and to do something more: to convince the Soviet Union that there
can be no reward in pursuing expansionism, to convince the Soviet
Union that reward lies in the pursuit of peace.
Fulfilling a Vision
Western policies must encourage the evolution of the Soviet Union
toward an open society. This task will test our strength. It will tax our
patience. And it will require a sweeping vision. Let me share with you
my vision. I see a Western Hemisphere of democratic, prosperous nations,
no longer threatened by a Cuba or a Nicaragua armed by Moscow. I see
a Soviet Union as it pulls away from ties to terrorist nations, like Libya,
that threaten the legitimate security of their neighbors. I see a Soviet
Union which respects China's integrity and returns the Northern
Territories to Japan, a prelude to the day when all the great nations of
Asia will live in harmony.
But the fulfillment of this vision requires the Soviet Union to take
positive steps, including:
First, reduce Soviet forces. Although some small steps have
already been taken, the Warsaw Pact still possesses more than 30,000
tanks, more than twice as much artillery and hundreds of thousands
more troops in Europe than NATO. They should cut their forces to less
threatening levels, in proportion to their legitimate security needs.
Second, adhere to the Soviet obligation, promised in the final
days of World War II, to support self-determination for all the nations of
Eastern and Central Europe. This requires specific abandonment of the
Brezhnev Doctrine. One day it should be possible to drive from Moscow to
Munich without seeing a single guard tower or a strand of barbed wire.
In short, tear down the Iron Curtain.
Third, work with the West in positive, practical-not merely
rhetorical-steps toward diplomatic solutions to these regional disputes
around the world. I welcome the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan
and the Angola agreement. But there is much more to be done around the
world. We're ready. Let's roll up our sleeves and get to work.
Fourth, achieve a lasting political pluralism and respect for human
rights. Dramatic events have already occurred in Moscow. We are
impressed by limited, but freely contested elections. We are impressed
by a greater toleration of dissent. We are impressed by a new frankness
about the Stalin era. Mr. Gorbachev, don't stop now.
Fifth, join with us in addressing pressing global problems,
including the international drug menace and dangers to the environment.
We can build a better world for our children.
9
Arms Control and Openness
As the Soviet Union moves toward arms reduction and reform, it will
find willing partners in the West. We seek verifiable, stabilizing arms
control and arms reduction agreements with the Soviet Union and its
allies. However, arms control is not an end in itself, but a means of
contributing to the security of America and the peace of the world. I
directed Secretary [of State] Baker to propose to the Soviets that we
resume negotiations on strategic forces in June; and, as you know, the
Soviets have agreed.
Our basic approach is clear. In the Strategic Arms Reduction Talks
[START], we wish to reduce the risk of nuclear war. In the companion
Defense and Space Talks, our objective will be to preserve our options
to deploy advanced defenses when they're ready. In nuclear testing, we
will continue to seek the necessary verification improvements in
existing treaties to permit them to be brought into force. We're going to
continue to seek a verifiable global ban on chemical weapons. We
support NATO efforts to reduce the Soviet offensive threat in the
negotiations on conventional forces in Europe. And as I've said,
fundamental to all of these objectives is simple openness.
Make no mistake, a new breeze is blowing across the steppes and
the cities of the Soviet Union. Why not, then, let this spirit of openness
grow, let more barriers come down. Open emigration, open debate,
open airwaves-let openness come to mean the publication and sale of
banned books and newspapers in the Soviet Union. Let the 19,000
Soviet Jews who emigrated last year be followed by any number who wish
to emigrate this year. And when people apply for exit visas, let there be
no harassment against them. Let openness come to mean nothing less
than the free exchange of people and books and ideas between East
and West.
And let it come to mean one thing more.
"Open Skies"
Thirty-four years ago, President Eisenhower met in Geneva with Soviet
leaders who, after the death of Stalin, promised a new approach toward
the West. He proposed a plan called "Open Skies," which would allow
unarmed aircraft from the United States and the Soviet Union to fly over
the territory of the other country. This would open up military activities
to regular scrutiny and, as President Eisenhower put it, "convince the
world that we are lessening danger and relaxing tension." President
Eisenhower's suggestion tested the Soviet readiness to open their
society. The Kremlin failed that test. Now, let us again explore that
proposal, but on a broader, more intrusive and radical basis, one which I
hope would include allies on both sides. We suggest that those
countries that wish to examine this proposal meet soon to work out the
10
necessary operational details, separately from other arms control
negotiations. Such surveillance flights, complementing satellites, would
provide regular scrutiny for both sides. Such unprecedented territorial
access would show the world the true meaning of the concept of
openness. The very Soviet willingness to-embrace such a concept
would reveal their commitment to change.
U.S.-Soviet Cooperation
Where there is cooperation, there can be a broader economic
relationship. But economic relations have been stifled by Soviet internal
policies. They've been injured by. Moscow's practice of using the cloak
of commerce to steal technology from the West. Ending discriminatory
treatment of U.S. firms would be a helpful step. Trade and financial
transactions should take place on a normal commercial basis.
And should the Soviet Union codify its emigration laws in accord
with international standards and implement its new laws faithfully, I am
prepared to work with Congress for a temporary waiver of the Jackson-
Vanik Amendment,* opening the way to extending Most-Favored-Nation
trade status* to the Soviet Union The policy I have just described
has everything to do with you
It is a sad truth that nothing forces us to recognize our common
humanity more swiftly than a natural disaster. I'm thinking, of course, of
Soviet Armenia, just a few months ago-a tragedy without blame, war-
like devastation without war. Our son took our 12-year-old grandson to
Yerevan. At the end of a day of comforting the injured and consoling
the bereaved, the father and son went to church, sat down together in the
midst of the ruins and wept. How can our two countries magnify this
simple expression of caring? How can we convey the goodwill of our
people?
Forty-three years ago, a young lieutenant by the name of Albert
Kotzebue, Class of 1945 at Texas A&M, was the first American soldier to
shake hands with the Soviets at the banks of the Elbe River. Once
again, we are ready to extend our hand. Once again, we are ready for a
hand in return. Once again, it is a time for peace.
*An amendment to the Trade Act of 1974 that prohibits the extension of credits and Most-Favored-Nation (MFN) trade
status to any non-market economy country that restricts the free emigration of its citizens.
"A country receiving such status gets the lowest tariff rate that the U.S. government generally extends to its other
trading partners.
11
REMARKS AT THE BOSTON UNIVERSITY
COMMENCEMENT CEREMONY
Boston, Massachusetts
May 21, 1989
T
ake a look at our world today. Nations are undergoing changes
SO radical that the international system you know and will know in the
future will be as different from today's, as today's world is from the
time of Woodrow Wilson. How will America prepare, then, for the
challenges ahead?
It's with your future in mind that, after deliberation and a review,
we are adapting our foreign policies to meet this challenge. I've outlined
how we're going to try to promote reform in Eastern Europe and how
we're going to work with our friends in Latin America. In Texas, I spoke to
another group of graduates of our new approach to the Soviet Union,
one of moving beyond containment, to seek to integrate the Soviets into
the community of nations, to help them share the rewards of
international cooperation.
Change in Western Europe
But today, I want to discuss the future of Europe, that mother of
nations and ideas that is so much a part of America. And it is fitting that I
share this forum with a very special friend of the United States-
President Mitterrand, you have the warm affection and high regard of
the American people. And I remember well about eight years ago when
you joined us in Yorktown [Virginia] in 1981 to celebrate the
bicentennial of that first Franco-American fight for freedom. And soon, I
will join you in Paris, sir, to observe the 200th anniversary of the French
struggle for liberty and equality.
This is just one example of the special bond between two
continents. But consider this city. From the Old North Church to Paul
Revere's home, nestled in the warm heart of the Italian North End, to
your famous song-filled Irish pubs-the Old and New Worlds are
inseparable in this city. But as we look back to Old World tradition, we
must look ahead to a new Europe. Historic changes will shape your
careers and your very lives.
The changes that are occurring in Western Europe are less
dramatic than those taking place in the East, but they are no less
12
fundamental. The postwar order that began in 1945 is transforming
into something very different. Yet certain essentials remain because our
Alliance with Western Europe is utterly unlike the cynical power
alliances of the past. It is based on far more than the perception of a
common enemy. It is a tie of culture and-kinship and shared values. As
we look toward the 21st century, Americans and Europeans alike should
remember the words of Raymond Aron, who called the Alliance a
"moral and spiritual community." Our ideals are those of the American
Bill of Rights and the French Declaration of the Rights of Man. And it is
precisely because the ideals of this community are universal that the
world is in ferment today.
Now a new century holds the promise of a united Europe. As you
know, the nations of Western Europe are already moving toward greater
economic integration, with the ambitious goal of a single European
market in 1992. The United States has often declared it seeks a healing of
old enmities, an integration of Europe. At the same time, there has
been an historical ambivalence on the part of some Americans towards a
more united Europe. To this ambivalence has been added
apprehension at the prospect of 1992. But whatever others may think, this
administration is of one mind. We believe a strong, united Europe
means a strong America.
Western Europe has a gross domestic product that is roughly
equal to our own and a'population that exceeds ours. European science
leads the world in many fields, and European workers are highly
educated and highly skilled. We are ready to develop, with the European
Community and its member states, new mechanisms of consultation
and cooperation on political-and global issues, from strengthening the
forces of democracy in the Third World to managing regional tensions,
to putting an end to the division of Europe. A resurgent Western Europe is
an economic magnet, drawing Eastern Europe closer, toward the
commonwealth of free nations. A more mature partnership with Western
Europe will pose new challenges. There are certain to be clashes and
controversies over economic issues. America will, of course, defend its
interests. But it is important to distinguish adversaries from allies and
allies from adversaries. What a tragedy; what an absurdity it would be if
future historians attribute the demise of the Western Alliance to
disputes over beef hormones and wars over pasta. We must all work hard
to ensure that the Europe of 1992 will adopt the lower barriers of the
modern international economy, not the high walls and the moats of
medieval commerce.
NATO: Maintaining Peace in Europe
But our hopes for the future rest ultimately on keeping the peace in
Europe. Forty-two years ago, just across the Charles River, Secretary of
13
State George Marshall gave a commencement address that outlined a
plan to help Europe recover. Western Europe responded heroically, and
later joined with us in a partnership for the common defense-a shield
we call NATO. This Alliance has always been driven by a spirited debate
over the best way to achieve peaceful change. But the deeper truth is
that the Alliance has achieved an historic peace because it is united by a
fundamental purpose. Behind the NATO shield, Europe has now
enjoyed 40 years free of conflict-the longest period of peace the
continent has ever known. Behind this shield, the nations of Western
Europe have risen from privation to prosperity-all because of the
strength and resolve of free peoples.
With a Western Europe that is now coming together, we recognize
that new forms of cooperation must be developed. We applaud the
defense cooperation developing in the revitalized Western European
Union, whose members worked with us to keep open the sea-lanes of the
Persian Gulf. We applaud the growing military cooperation between
West Germany and France. We welcome British and French programs to
modernize their deterrent capability and their moves toward cooper-
ation in this area. It is perfectly right and proper that Europeans
increasingly see their defense cooperation as an investment in a secure
future. But we do have a major concern of a different order-a growing
complacency throughout the West.
Of course, your generation can hardly be expected to share the
grip of past anxieties. With such a long peace; it is hard to imagine how it
could be otherwise. But our expectations in this rapidly changing world
cannot race SO far ahead that we forget what is at stake. There's a great
irony here. While an ideological earthquake- is shaking asunder the very
communist foundation, the West is being tested by complacency.
We must never forget that, twice in this century, American blood
has been shed over conflicts that began in Europe. We share the fervent
desire of Europeans to relegate war forever to the province of distant
memory. But that is why the Atlantic Alliance is so central to our foreign
policy. That's why America remains committed to the Alliance and the
strategy which has preserved freedom in Europe. We must never forget
that to keep the peace in Europe is to keep the peace for America.
NATO's policy of flexible response keeps the United States linked
to Europe and lets any would-be aggressors know that they will be
met with any level of force needed to repel their attack and frustrate
their designs. Our short-range deterrent forces, based in Europe and kept
up to date, demonstrate that America's vital interests are bound
inextricably to Western Europe, and that an attacker can never gamble on
a test of strength with just our conventional forces. Though hope is
now running high for a more peaceful continent, the history of this
century teaches Americans and Europeans to remain prepared.
14
East-West Relations
As we search for a peace that is enduring, I'm grateful for the steps that
Mr. Gorbachev is taking. If the Soviets advance solid and constructive
plans for peace, then we should give credit where credit is due. We're
seeing sweeping changes in the Soviet-Union that show promise of
enduring, of becoming ingrained. At the same time, in an era of
extraordinary change, we have an obligation to temper optimism-and I
am optimistic-with prudence.
For example, the Soviet foreign minister informed the world last
week that his nation's commitment to destroy SS-23 missiles under the
recently enacted INF [Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces] Treaty may
be reversible. The Soviets must surely-know the results of failure to
comply with this solemn agreement. Perhaps their purpose was to
divide the West on other issues that you're reading about in the papers
today. But regardless, it is clear that Soviet new thinking has not yet
totally overcome the old.
I believe in a deliberate, step-by-step approach to East-West
relations because recurring signs show that while change in the Soviet
Union is dramatic, it's not yet complete. The Warsaw Pact retains a
nearly 12-to-one advantage over the Atlantic Alliance in short-range
missile and rocket la mchers capable of delivering nuclear weapons;
and more than a tv to-one vantage in battle tanks. For that reason, we
will also maintain, in cooper
ith our allies, ground and air forces
in Europe as long as they, are
ed and needed to preserve the peace in
Europe. At the same time; my administration will place a high and
continuing priority on negotiating. apless militarized Europe, one with a
secure conventional force balance at lower levels of forces. Our
aspiration is a real peace-a peace of shared optimism, not a peace of
armed camps.
A Moral and Spiritual Community
Nineteen-ninety-two is the 500th anniversary of the discovery of the
New World. So we have five centuries to celebrate, nothing less than our
very civilization-the American Bill of Rights and the French Rights of
Man, the ancient and unwritten Constitution of Great Britain, and the
democratic visions of Konrad Adenauer and Alcide de Gasperi.
And in all our celebrations, we observe one fact: This truly is a
moral and spiritual community. It is our inheritance and so let us protect
it. Let us promote it. Let us treasure it for our children, for Americans
and Europeans yet unborn.
15
REMARKS AT THE COAST GUARD ACADEMY
GRADUATION CEREMONY
New London, Connecticut
May 24, 1989
T.
oday our world-your world-is changing, East and West. And
today I want to speak to you about the world we want to see, and what we
can do to bring that new world into clear focus.
The Democratic Idea
We live in a time when we are witnessing the end of an idea-the final
chapter of the communist experiment. Communism is now
recognized-even by many within the communist world itself-as a
failed system, one that promised economic prosperty but failed to deliver
the goods, a system that built a wall between the Pople and their
political aspirations.
But the eclipse of communism is che-half of the story of our
time. The other is the ascendancy of the democratic idea. Never before
has the idea of freedom SO captured the imaginations men and
women the world over. And never before has the hore Oi freedom
beckoned SO many: trade unionists in Warsaw, the eòple of Panama,
rulers consulting the ruled in the Soviet Union. And even as we speak
today, the world is transfixed by the dramatic vents in Tiananmen
Square. Everywhere those voices are speaking the language of democracy
and freedom, and we hear them, and the world hears them, and
America will do all it can to encourage them.
So today I want to speak about our security strategy for the
1990s-one that advances American ideals and upholds American aims.
Amidst the many challenges we'll face, there will be risks. But let
me assure you, we'll find more than our share of opportunities. We and
our allies are strong-stronger really than at any point in the postwar
period-and more capable than ever of supporting the cause of freedom.
There's an opportunity before us to shape a new world.
Free Markets and Security
What is it that we want to see? It is a growing community of
democracies anchoring international peace and stability, and a dynamic
16
free market system generating prosperity and progress on a global
scale. The economic foundation of this new era is the proven success of
the free market, and nurturing that foundation are the values rooted in
freedom and democracy.
Our country, America, was founded on these values and they gave
us the confidence that flows from strength. So let's be clear about one
thing: America looks forward to the challenge of an emerging global
market. But these values are not ours alone; they are now shared by our
friends and allies around the globe.
The economic rise of Europe and the nations of the Pacific Rim is
the growing success of our postwar policy. This time is a time of
tremendous opportunity, and destiny is in our own hands. To reach the
world we want to see, we've got to work, and work hard. There's a lot of
work ahead of us.
We must resolve international trade problems that threaten to pit
friends and allies against one another. We must combat misguided
notions of economic nationalism that will tell us to close off our
economies to foreign competition, just when the global marketplace has
become a fact of life.
We must open the door- to the nations of Eastern Europe and
other socialist countries that embrace free market reforms.
And finally, for developing nations heavily burdened with debt, we
must provide assistance and encourage the market reforms that will set
those nations on a path towards growth.
If we succeed, the next decade and the century beyond will be an
era of unparalleled growth, an era which sees the flourishing of freedom,
peace and prosperity around the world.
But this new era cannot unfold in a climate where conflict and
turmoil exist. And therefore, our goals must also include security and
stability: security for ourselves and our allies and our friends; stability
in the international arena and an end to regional conflicts.
Such goals are constant, but the strategy we employ to reach them
can and must change as the world changes. Today, the need for a dynamic
and adaptable strategy is imperative. We must be
strong-economically, diplomatically and, as you know, militarily-to
take advantage of the opportunities open to us in a world of rapid
change. And nowhere will the ultimate consequences of change have
more significance for world security than within the Soviet Union itself.
Change in the Soviet Union
What we're seeing now in the Soviet Union is indeed dramatic. The
process is still ongoing, unfinished. But make no mistake-our policy is to
seize every, and I mean every, opportunity to build a better, more stable
relationship with the Soviet Union-just as it is our policy to defend
17
American interests in light of the enduring reality of Soviet military
power.
We want to see perestroika succeed. And we want to see the policies
of glasnost and perestroika-so far, a revolution imposed from top
down-institutionalized within the Soviet Union. And we want to see
perestroika extended as well. We want to see a Soviet Union that
restructures its relationship toward the rest of the world, a Soviet
Union that is a force for constructive solutions to the world's problems.
The grand strategy of the West during the postwar period has been
based on the concept of containment: checking the Soviet Union's
expansionist aims, in the hope that the Soviet system itself would one
day be forced to confront its internal contradictions. The ferment in the
Soviet Union today affirms the wisdom, of this strategy. And now we
have a precious opportunity to move beyond containment. You're
graduating into an exciting world, where the opportunity for
peace-world peace, lasting peace-has never been better.
Our goal, integrating the Soviet Union into the community of
nations, is every bit as ambitious as containment was at its time. And it
holds tremendous promise for international stability.
Coping with a changing Soviet Union will be a challenge of the
highest order. But the security challenges we face today do not come from
the East alone. The emergence of regional powers is rapidly changing
the strategic landscape.
Proliferation of Weapons
In the Middle East, in South Asia, in our own hemisphere, a growing
number of nations are acquiring advanced and highly destructive
capabilities-in some cases, weapons of mass destruction and the
means to deliver them. And it is an unfortunate fact that the world faces
increasing threat from armed insurgencies, terrorists, and as you in the
Coast Guard are well aware, narcotics traffickers-and, in some regions,
an unholy alliance of all three.
Our task is clear: We must curb the proliferation of advanced
weaponry; we must check the aggressive ambitions of renegade regimes;
and we must enhance the ability of our friends to defend themselves.
We have not yet mastered the complex challenge. We and our allies must
construct a common strategy for stability in the developing world.
Deterrence
How we and our allies deal with these diverse challenges depends on
how well we understand the key elements of defense strategy. And so let
me just mention today two points in particular:
-first, the need for an effective deterrent, one that demonstrates to
our allies and adversaries alike American strength, American resolve;
18
-and second, the need to maintain an approach to arms reduction
that promotes stability at the lowest feasible level of armaments.
Deterrence is central to our defense strategy. The key to keeping
the peace is convincing our adversaries that the cost of aggression against
us or our allies is simply unacceptable.
In today's world, nuclear forces are essential to deterrence. Our
challenge is to protect those deterrent systems from attack. And that's
why we'll move Peacekeeper ICBMs out of fixed and vulnerable silos,
making them mobile and thus harder to target. Looking to the longer
term, we will also develop and deploy a new highly mobile single-
warhead missile, the Midgetman.-With only minutes of warnings, these
new missiles can relocate out of harm's way. Any attack against
systems like this will fail.
We are also researching-and we are committed to deploy when
ready-a more comprehensive defensive system, known as SDI (Strategic
Defense Initiative). Our premise is straightforward: Defense against
incoming missiles endangers no person, endangers no country.
Arms Reductions
We're also working to reduce- the threat we face, both nuclear and
conventional. The INF (Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces) Treaty
demonstrates that willingness. In addition, in the past decade, NATO
has unilaterally removed 2,400 shorter-range theater warheads. But
theater nuclear forces contribute to stability no less than strategic
forces, and thus it would be irresponsible to depend solely on strategic
nuclear forces to deter conflict in Europe.
The conventional balance in Europe is just as important and is
linked to the nuclear balance. For more than 40 years-and look at your
history books to see how pronounced this accomplishment is-the
Warsaw Pact's massive advantage in conventional forces has cast a
shadow over Europe.
The unilateral reductions that President Gorbachev has promised
give us hope that we can now redress that imbalance. We welcome those
steps because, if implemented, they will help reduce the threat of
surprise attack. And they confirm what we've said all along, that Soviet
military power far exceeds the levels needed to defend the legitimate
security interests of the USSR. And we must keep in mind that these
reductions alone, even if implemented, are not enough to eliminate
the significant numerical superiority that the Soviet Union enjoys right
now.
Through negotiation, we can now transform the military landscape
of Europe. The issues are complex, stakes are very high. But the Soviets
are now being forthcoming, and we hope to achieve the reductions that
we seek.
19
Let me emphasize-our aim is nothing less than removing war as
an option in Europe.
The USSR has said that it is willing to abandon its age-old reliance
on offensive strategy. It's time to begin. This should mean a smaller force,
one less reliant on tanks and artillery and personnel carriers that
provide the Soviets' offensive striking power. A restructured Warsaw
Pact-one that mirrors the defensive posture of NATO-would make
Europe and the world more secure.
Openness
Peace can also be enhanced by movement towards more openness in
military activities. And two weeks ago, I proposed an "Open Skies"
initiative to extend the concept of openness. That plan for territorial
overflights would increase our mutual security against sudden and
threatening military activities. In the same spirit, let us extend this
openness to military expenditures as well. I call on the Soviets to do as we
have always done. Let's open the ledgers. Publish an accurate defense
budget.
But as we move forward, we must be realistic. Transformations of
this magnitude will not happen overnight. If we are to reach our goals, a
great deal is required of us, our allies and of the Soviet Union. But we
can succeed.
Inheritance of Freedom
I began today by speaking about the triumph of a particular, peculiar,
very special American ideal: freedom. And I know there are those who may
think there's something presumptuous about that claim, those who
will think it's boastful. But it is not, for one simple reason: Democracy
isn't our creation; it is our inheritance.
And we can't take credit for democracy, but we can take that
precious gift of freedom, preserve it and pass it on, as my generation does
to you, and you, too, will do one day. And perhaps-provided we seize
the opportunities open to us-we can help others attain the freedom that
we cherish.
As I said on the Capitol steps the day I took this office, as
President of the United States, "There is but one just use of power, and it
is to serve people." As your commander in chief, let me call on this
Coast Guard class to reaffirm with me that American power will continue
in its service to the enduring ideals of democracy and freedom.
20
REMARKS UPON DEPARTURE FOR EUROPE
Andrews Air Force Base, Maryland
May 26, 1989
I
depart for Europe this morning to meet with all our North
Atlantic allies, and also to pay visits to Italy, Germany and the United
Kingdom for discussions with the leaders of those Alliance nations on
issues of common interest.
Celebrating NATO
I am especially pleased that my first visit to Europe as president is to
celebrate the 40th anniversary of NATO. America is a proud partner in the
Atlantic Alliance-and American interests have been well served by
the Alliance.
Twice in the first half of this century, Europe was the scene of
world war. Twice, Americans fought in Europe for the sake of peace and
freedom. Today, Europe is enjoying a period of unparalleled prosperity
and uninterrupted peace-longer than any it has known in the modern
age. NATO has made the difference-and the Alliance will prove every
bit as important to American and European security in the decade ahead.
21
United Europe
The importance of the Alliance and its democratic underpinnings is the
message I now take to Europe. NATO has been a success by any measure.
But success breeds its own challenges. Today, dramatic changes are
taking place in Europe, East and West. For us, those changes bring new
challenges and unparalleled opportunities.
For too long, unnatural and inhuman barriers have divided East
from West. We hope to overcome that division, to see a Europe that is
truly free, united and at peace. We are ready to work with a united
Europe, to extend the peace and prosperity we enjoy to other parts of the
world. And we hope to move beyond containment-to integrate the
Soviet Union into the community of nations.
We welcome the political and economic liberalization that has
taken place SO far in the Soviet Union and in some countries of Eastern
Europe. We watch hoping that more changes will follow.
Trans-Atlantic Partnership
Many common concerns confront us. Beyond the traditional economic
and security spheres, we and our partners in the Alliance are working hard
on a growing international agenda-from a common approach to
environmental protection, to cooperation against terrorism and drug
trafficking.
We also welcome Europe's progress towards a truly common
market and growing European cooperation on security issues as the basis
of an even more dynamic trans-Atlantic partnership. As we approach
1992, it is essential that we work with our European partners to ensure an
open and expanding world trading system, and that we take strong
steps to prevent trade disputes from obscuring our common political and
security concerns.
NATO is based on the many bonds between us: our shared
heritage, history and culture; our shared commitment to freedom,
democracy and the rights of the individual. These values represent the
moral compass of America and the values I will bring to the summit.
22
REMARKS AT RHEINGOLDHALLE
Mainz, Federal Republic of Germany
May 31, 1989
T.
oday, I come to speak, not just of our mutual defense, but of our
shared values. I come to speak, not just of the matters of the mind, but of
the deeper aspirations of the heart.
A Common Heritage
Just this morning, Barbara and I were charmed with the experiences we
had. I met with a small group of German students, bright young men and
women who studied in the United States. Their knowledge of our
country and the world was impressive to say the least. But sadly, too many
in the West, Americans and Europeans alike, seem to have forgotten
the lessons of our common heritage and how the world we know came to
be. And that should not be, and that cannot be. We must recall that the
generation coming into its own in America and Western Europe is heir to
gifts greater than those bestowed to any generation in history-peace,
freedom and prosperity.
This inheritance is possible because 40 years ago the nations of
the West joined in that noble, common cause called NATO. First there was
the vision, the concept of free peoples in North America and Europe
working to protect their values. And second, there was the practical
sharing of risks and burdens, and a realistic recognition of Soviet
expansionism. And finally, there was the determination to look beyond
23
old animosities. The NATO Alliance did nothing less than provide
a way for Western Europe to heal centuries-old rivalries, to begin an era
of reconciliation and restoration. It has been, in fact, a second
Renaissance of Europe.
Four Decades
As you know best, this is not just the 40th birthday of the Alliance. It's
also the 40th birthday of the Federal Republic-a republic born in hope,
tempered by challenge. At the height of the Berlin crisis in 1948, Ernst
Reuter called on Germans to stand firm and confident, and you
did-courageously, magnificently.
And the historic genius of the German people has flourished in
this age of peace. And your nation has become a leader in technology and
the fourth largest economy on Earth. But more important, you have
inspired the world by forcefully promoting the principles of human rights,
democracy and freedom. The United States and the Federal Republic
have always been firm friends and allies. But today we share an added
role: partners in leadership.
Of course, leadership has a constant companion-responsibility
And our responsibility is to look ahead and grasp the promise of the
future.
I said recently that we're at the end of one era and at the beginning
of another. And I'noted that, in regard to the Soviet Union, our policy is to
move beyond containment.
For 40 years, the seeds of democracy in Eastern Europe lay
dormant, buried under the frozen tundra of the Cold War. And for 40 years,
the world has waited for the Cold War to end. And decade after decade,
time after time, the flowering human spirit withered from the chill of
conflict and oppression. And again, the world waited. But the passion
for freedom cannot be denied forever. The world has waited long enough.
The time is right. Let Europe be whole and free.
One Europe
To the founders of the Alliance, this aspiration was a distant dream,
and now it's the new mission of NATO. If ancient rivals like Britain and
France, or France and Germany, can reconcile, then why not the nations
of the East and West?
In the East, brave men and women are showing us the way. Look at
Poland, where Solidarity-Solidarnosc-and the Catholic Church have won
legal status. The forces of freedom are putting the Soviet status quo on
the defensive.
In the West, we have succeeded because we've been faithful to our
values and our vision. And on the other side of the rusting Iron Curtain,
their vision failed.
24
The Cold War began with the division of Europe. It can only end
when Europe is whole. Today, it is this very concept of a divided Europe
that is under siege. And that's why our hopes run especially high,
because the division of Europe is under siege not by armies, but by the
spread of ideas that began here, right here. It was a son of Mainz,
Johannes Gutenberg, who liberated the mind of man through the power of
the printed word.
And that same liberating power is unleashed today in a hundred
new forms. The Voice of America, Deutsche Welle allow us to enlighten
millions deep within Eastern Europe and throughout the world.
Television satellites allow us to bear witness from the shipyards of
Gdansk to Tiananmen Square. But the momentum for freedom does
not just come from the printed word or the transistor or the television
screen. It comes from a single powerful idea-democracy.
Struggle for Democracy
This one idea-this one idea is sweeping across Eurasia. This one idea
is why the communist world, from Budapest to Beijing, is in ferment. Of
course, for the leaders of the East, it's not just freedom for freedom's
sake. But whatever their motivation, they are unleashing a force they will
find difficult to channel or control-the hunger for liberty of oppressed
peoples who have tasted freedom.
Nowhere is this more apparent than in Eastern Europe, the
birthplace of the Cold War. In Poland, at the end of World War II, the
Soviet army prevented the free elections promised by Stalin at Yalta.
And today, Poles are taking the first steps toward real elections, SO long
promised, so long deferred. And in Hungary, at last we see a chance for
multi-party competition at the ballot box.
As president, I will continue to do all I can to help open the closed
societies of the East. We seek self-determination for all of Germany and
all of Eastern Europe. And we will not relax, and we must not waver.
Again, the world has waited long enough.
But democracy's journey East is not easy. Intellectuals like the
great Czech playwright, Vaclav Havel, still work under the shadow of
coercion. And repression still menaces too many peoples of Eastern
Europe. Barriers and barbed wire still fence in nations. So when I visit
Poland and Hungary this summer, I will deliver this message: There
cannot be a common European home until all within it are free to move
from room to room.
U.S. Proposals
And I'll take another message: The path of freedom leads to a larger
home-a home where West meets East, a democratic home-the
commonwealth of free nations.
25
And I said that positive steps by the Soviets would be met by steps
of our own. And this is why I announced on May 12 a readiness to consider
granting to the Soviets a temporary waiver of the Jackson-Vanik* trade
restrictions, if they liberalize emigration. And this is also why I announced
on Monday [May 29] that the United States is prepared to drop the "no
exceptions" standard that has guided our approach to controlling the
export of technology to the Soviet Union-lifting a sanction enacted in
response to their invasion of Afghanistan.
And in this same spirit, I set forth four proposals to heal Europe's
tragic division, to help Europe become whole and free.
First, I propose we strengthen and broaden the Helsinki Process to
promote free elections and political pluralism in Eastern Europe. As the
forces of freedom and democracy rise in the East, so should our
expectations.
And weaving together the slender threads of freedom in the
East will require much from the Western democracies. In particular, the
great political parties of the West must assume an historic
responsibility--to lend counsel and support to those brave men and
women who are trying to form the first truly representative political
parties in the East, to advance freedom and democracy, to part the Iron
Curtain.
The Wall
In fact, it's already begun to part. The frontier of barbed wire and
minefields between Hungary and Austria is being removed, foot by foot,
mile by mile. Just as the barriers are coming down in Hungary, SO must
they fall throughout all of Eastern Europe. Let Berlin be next. Let Berlin
be next.
Nowhere is the division between East and West seen more clearly
than in Berlin. And there this brutal Wall cuts neighbor from neighbor,
brother from brother. And that Wall stands as a monument to the
failure of communism. It must come down.
Now, glasnost may be a Russian word, but openness is a Western
concept. West Berlin has always enjoyed the openness of a free city. And
our proposal would make all Berlin a center of commerce between East
and West-a place of cooperation, not a point of confrontation. And we
rededicate ourselves to the 1987 allied initiative to strengthen freedom
and security in that divided city. This, then is my second proposal-bring
glasnost to East Berlin.
*These restrictions, set out in the Jackson-Vanik Amendment to the Trade Act of 1974, prohibit the extension of credits
and Most-Favored-Nation [MFN] trade status to any non-market economy country that restricts the free emigration of its
citizens.
26
Environment
My generation remembers a Europe ravaged by war. And of course,
Europe has long since rebuilt its proud cities and restored its majestic
cathedrals. But what a tragedy it would be if your continent was again
spoiled, this time by a more subtle and insidious danger-the chancellor
referred to it-that of poisoned rivers and acid rain.
America has faced an environmental tragedy in Alaska. Countries
from France to Finland suffered after Chernobyl. West Germany is
struggling to save the Black Forest today. And throughout, we have all
learned a terrible lesson: Environmental destruction respects no borders.
So my third proposal is to work together on these environmental
problems, with the United States and Western Europe extending a hand
to the East. Since much remains to be done in both East and West, we
ask Eastern Europe to join us in this common struggle. We can offer
technical training, assistance in drafting laws and regulations, and new
technologies for tackling these awesome problems. And I invite the
environmentalists and engineers of the East to visit the West to share
knowledge SO we can succeed in this great cause.
Arms Control
My fourth proposal, actually, a set of proposals, concerns a less
militarized Europe, the most heavily armed continent in the world.
Nowhere is this more important than in the two Germanys. And that's
why our quest to safely reduce armaments has a special significance for
the German people.
To those who are impatient with our measured pace in arms
reductions, I respectfully suggest that history teaches us a lesson-that
unity and strength are the catalysts and prerequisites to arms control.
We've always believed that a strong Western defense is the best road to
peace. Forty years of experience have proven us right.
But we've done more than just keep the peace. By standing
together, we have convinced the Soviets that their arms buildup has been
costly and pointless. Let us not give them incentives to return to the
policies of the past. Let us give them every reason to abandon the arms
race for the sake of the human race.
In this era of both negotiation and armed camps, America
understands that West Germany bears a special burden. Of course, in this
nuclear age, every nation is on the front line. But not all free nations
are called to endure the tension of regular military activity or the constant
presence of foreign military forces. We are sensitive to these special
conditions that this needed presence imposes.
To significantly ease the burden of armed camps in Europe, we
must be aggressive in our pursuit of solid, verifiable agreements between
NATO and the Warsaw Pact.
27
On Monday [May 29.], with my NATO colleagues in Brussels, I
shared my great hope for the future of conventional arms negotiations in
Europe. I shared with them a proposal for achieving significant
reductions in the near future.
And as you know, the Warsaw Pact has now accepted major
elements of our Western approach to the new conventional arms
negotiations in Vienna. The Eastern bloc acknowledges that a
substantial imbalance exists between the conventional forces of the two
alliances. And they've moved closer to NATO's position by accepting
most elements of our initial conventional arms proposal. These
encouraging steps have produced the opportunity for creative and
decisive action, and we shall not let that opportunity pass.
Arms Reductions and Parity
Our proposal has several key initiatives.
I propose that we "lock in" the Eastern agreement to Western-
proposed ceilings on tanks and armored troop carriers. We should also
seek an agreement on common numerical ceilings for artillery in the
range between NATO's and that of the Warsaw Pact, provided these
definitional problems can be solved. And the weapons we remove must
be destroyed.
We should expand our current offer to include all land-based
combat aircraft and helicopters by proposing that both sides reduce in
these categories to a level 15 percent below the current NATO totals.
Given the Warsaw Pact's advantage in numbers, the Pact would have to
make far deeper reductions than NATO to establish parity at those
lower levels. Again, the weapons we remove must be destroyed.
I propose a 20-percent cut in combat manpower in U.S.-stationed
forces, and a resulting ceiling on U.S. and Soviet ground and air forces
stationed outside of national territory in the Atlantic-to-the-Urals zone
at approximately 275,000 each. This reduction to parity, a fair and
balanced level of strength, would compel the Soviets to reduce their
600,000-strong Red army in Eastern Europe by 325,000. And these
withdrawn forces must be demobilized.
And finally, I call on President Gorbachev to accelerate the
timetable for reaching these agreements. There is no reason why the five-
to-six year timetable, as suggested by Moscow, is necessary. I propose
a much more ambitious schedule. And we should aim to reach an
agreement within six months to a year and accomplish reductions by
1992, or 1993 at the latest.
"Open Skies" and Proliferation
In addition to my conventional arms proposals, I believe that we ought
to strive to improve the openness with which we and the Soviets conduct
28
our military activities. And therefore, I want to reiterate my support for
greater transparency. I renew my proposal that the Soviet Union and its
allies open their skies to reciprocal, unarmed aerial surveillance flights,
conducted on short notice to watch military activities. Satellites are a very
important way to verify arms control agreements. But they do not
provide constant coverage of the Soviet Union. An "Open Skies" policy
would move both sides closer to a total continuity of coverage, while
symbolizing greater openness between East and West.
These are my proposals to achieve a less militarized Europe. A
short time ago they would have been too revolutionary to consider. And
yet today, we may well be on the verge of a more ambitious agreement
in Europe than anyone considered possible.
But we are also challenged by developments outside of NATO's
traditional areas of concern. Every Western nation still faces the global
proliferation of lethal technologies, including ballistic missiles and
chemical weapons. We must collectively control the spread of these
growing threats. So we should begin as soon as possible with a
worldwide ban on chemical weapons.
A Vision for Europe
Growing political freedom in the East, a Berlin without barriers, a
cleaner environment, a less militarized Europe-each is a noble goal, and
taken together, they are the foundation of our larger vision: a Europe
that is free and at peace with itself. And so, let the Soviets know that our
goal is not to undermine their legitimate security interests. Our goal is
to convince them, step by step, that their definition of security is obsolete,
that their deepest fears are unfounded.
When Western Europe takes its giant step in 1992, it will
institutionalize what's been true for years-borders open to people,
commerce and ideas. No shadow of suspicion, no sinister fear, is cast
between you. The very prospect of war within the West is unthinkable to
our citizens. But such a peaceful integration of nations into a world
community does not mean that any nation must relinquish its culture,
much less its sovereignty.
This process of integration, a subtle weaving of shared interests,
which is SO nearly complete in Western Europe, has now finally begun in
the East. We want to help the nations of Eastern Europe realize what
we, the nations of Western Europe, learned long ago. The foundation of
lasting security comes, not from tanks, troops or barbed wire. It is built
on shared values and agreements that link free peoples.
The nations of Eastern Europe are rediscovering the glories of
their national heritage. So let the colors and hues of national culture
return to these gray societies of the East. Let Europe forego a peace of
tension for a peace of trust, one in which the peoples of the East and West
29
REMARKS UPON ARRIVAL AT PEASE AIR FORCE BASE
Portsmouth, New Hampshire
June 2, 1989
I
n the last week, Barbara and I have been to Rome and the Vatican,
Brussels, Bonn and London, and working with our allies in Europe, we set
a course for the future. And we must move to fulfill that promise,
moving beyond containment, moving beyond the era of conflict and Cold
War that the world has known for more than 40 years, because keeping
the peace in Europe means keeping the peace for America. Our Alliance
seeks a less militarized Europe-a safer world for all of us.
And I'm now returning from Europe with a message for the
American people-a message of hope. We have a great and historic
opportunity to shape the changes that are transforming Europe. This
chance has been delivered not just because of our strength and resolve,
but also because of our power of ideas, especially one idea which is
sweeping the communist world-democracy.
Charting the Path to Peace
For the last six weeks, I've presented, in a series of speeches, ways to
deal with these changes to make the most of this opportunity. And let me
summarize: In Michigan I stressed that the United States will actively
encourage peaceful reform led by the forces of freedom in Eastern
Europe. The Texas speech explains America's commitment to a
balanced approach in our relationship with the Soviet Union-that we
must remain strong and realistic, judge their performance, not their
rhetoric, all the while seeking a friendship with the Soviets that knows no
season of suspicion.
And at Boston University the focus was our partnership with a
more united Western Europe-how a strong Europe means a strong
America. And then at the Coast Guard Academy I said that America is
ready to seize every-and I do mean every-opportunity to bring the
Soviet Union into the community of nations. And then, with my
colleagues in Brussels, on the 40th anniversary of the founding of the
North Atlantic Alliance, we celebrated NATO's 40 years of success in
31
preserving the peace in Europe-the longest period without war in all the
recorded history of that continent.
And we were reminded that once again the future of SO many
nations depends on NATO's unity and resolve. We were reminded that
NATO must remain strong and together, and we were challenged to
seize this new opportunity for progress while staying true to the principles
that got us here.
Well, we met that challenge. We agreed to strive-to hope-for a
Europe that is whole and free. At the Rheingoldhalle in Mainz, in the heart
of Germany, I said that the Cold War began with the division of Europe,
and it must end with a reconciliation based on shared values, where East
joins West in a commonwealth of free nations.
Arms and Environment
And that is my vision for the future, and here is how we get there. The
Warsaw Pact has a lot more planes, a lot more arms, a lot more troops in
Europe than the NATO Alliance, and we challenge the Soviets, if they
are serious, to reduce to equal numbers. Our proposal is bold, but
fundamentally fair, and every single one of our allies agreed with our
proposal.
We proposed a new initiative for more comprehensive and faster
negotiated cuts in conventional arms to lift the West at last from the
shadow cast over Europe since 1945 by massive Soviet ground and air
forces, and our allies agreed. And we proposed that Berlin, East and West,
become a center of cooperation, not confrontation. And our allies
agreed. And we proposed that we strengthen the Helsinki Process to
support free elections in Eastern Europe, and our allies agreed.
Because the threat of environmental destruction knows no
borders, we proposed that the West enlist the countries of Eastern Europe
in one of the great causes of our time-the common struggle to save
our natural heritage.
And, with our agreement in NATO on our short-range nuclear
forces in Europe, we demonstrated as an Alliance that we can manage
change while remaining true to the strategy of deterrence which has
kept the peace.
New World
In short, this week's NATO summit in Brussels showed that we are
ready to help shape a new world. In this period of historic change, the
NATO Alliance has never been more united, never been stronger, and
we issued a summit declaration detailing our vision for the future and
plan of action. And ours is not an arrogant challenge to Mr. Gorbachev,
it's an appeal in good faith. The summit was a triumph for the Alliance, a
triumph of ideas, and-most of all-it was a triumph of hope.
32
And let me say, it is truly gratifying that all of this was understood
so well at home and abroad. While keeping our defenses up and our eyes
wide open, we must go forward. We must stay on the offensive. We
must get to work now to end the Cold War. The world has waited long
enough, and if we succeed, the world your children will know-the
world of the 21st century-will be all the better.
United States Information Agency
July 1989