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
1554438
label
Third Debate: Briefing Cards from Second Debate
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
1554438
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Third Debate: Briefing Cards from Second Debate
citationUrl
collections
White House Special Files Unit Files
Ford - Carter Debates Files
subjects
Campaign debates
International relations
Presidential campaign, 1976
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
1554438
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1976-10-31
month
10
year
1976
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1976-10-01
month
10
year
1976
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
efe4ecf0e6ab1ccb
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box 3, folder "Third Debate: Briefing Cards from
Second Debate" of the White House Special Files Unit Files at the Gerald R. Ford
Presidential Library.
Copyright Notice
The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of
photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald Ford donated to the United
States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.
Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public
domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to
remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid
copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
\
FOREIGN POLICY
GENERAL
1
DEFENSE
!
THE PRESIDENT HAS SEEN *
I'm
GERALD ? FORD
1
TO: THE PRESIDENT:
Briefing materials for LAST DEBATE. This folder
contains materials you used for the Second Debate.
Wile
Mike Duval
10/17/76
DEFENSE SPENDING
1964
1974
1976
(Vietnam)
PERCENT OF FEDERAL BUDGET
43
29
24
PERCENT OF GNP
8.3
5.8
5.7
DEFENSE EMPLOYMENT AS A
7.9
5.2
4.8
PERCENT OF U.S. LABOR FORCE
CARTER ON KISSINGER
"HE'S (KISSINGER) A REMARKABLE MAN AND A VERY GOOD FRIEND OF MINE.
HE'S THE KIND OF PERSON WHO HAS A TREMENDOUS SENSE OF HUMOR AND
WHO, I THINK, IS PRESERVING THE CHARACTER OF HIS NATION IN A
SUPERLATIVE WAY DURING THE TIMES THAT ARE so TRYING TO US ALL."
SPEECH, B'NAI B'RITH
APRIL 20, 1974
ANSWER TO EVERY CARTER ATTACK
1. WE ARE AT PEACE -- THE ULTIMATE TEST OF OUR FOREIGN AND
DEFENSE POLICIES,
2. MR. CARTER, IF ELECTED, WOULD GO INTO OFFICE AS THE MOST
INEXPERIENCED PRESIDENT IN FOREIGN AND DEFENSE AFFAIRS
SINCE THE LATE 1800's.
SUGGESTED FIRST RESPONSE FOR THE PRESIDENT:
I CANNOT COMMENT ON MY OPPONENT'S POLICIES OR RECORD
BECAUSE HE HAS NONE.
HIS ANSWER REFLECTS HIS INEXPERIENCE. IT IS NOT THE ANSWER
A PRESIDENT WOULD GIVE TO A QUESTION ON SUCH A SERIOUS
SUBJECT.
LET ME RESPOND IN A POSITIVE WAY:
-2-
FIRST, HERE ARE THE FACTS:
[ONE OR TWO FACTS RELATING TO THE SUBJECT OF
THE ORIGINAL QUESTION. ]
ACCORDINGLY, THE POLICY OF THE UNITED STATES IS:
[INSERT ONE OR TWO SENTENCES]
SECOND, MY SECRETARY OF STATE NEEDS NO DEFENSE. HE
CARRIES OUT MY POLICIES AND MY DECISIONS WITH UNMAT CHED
-3-
EXCELLENCE. WE HAVE MET THE ULTIMATE TEST OF ANY
PRESIDENT'S DEFENSE AND FOREIGN POLICIES. WE ARE A
NATION AT PEACE.
FACTS ON LETELIER BOMBING
-- FORMER CHILEAN AMBASSADOR TO THE UNITED STATES, ORLANDO
LETELIER WAS KILLED BY AN AUTOMOBILE BOMB ON SEPTEMBER 21ST.
-- THE FBI BEGAN AN INVESTIGATION IMMEDIATELY. IT IS A HIGH
PRIORITY INVESTIGATION WITH 75 TO 100 AGENTS WORKING ON THE
CASE.
Teddy R.
Carter on Being Tougher with the Russians
::
Carter says he would be tougher in dealing with the Soviets.
A: It is difficult to understand how Mr. Carter rationalizes
"being tough" with:
- Cutting the Defense budget by $5 to $7 billion.
)
- Scrapping the B-1
- Reducing US forces based in Europe and Korea.
- Closing bases.
- Keeping the door open to Communist participation in
European governments.
Q: Carter says he would rely more heavily on our allies.
A: How would he maintain their confidence at the same time he:
- Withdraws US forces (from NATO and Korea) ?
- Refuses arms sales to them?
- Promises to rethink our NATO relationship?
- Casts doubt on whether we would be a reliable ally?
REBUTTAL ON CHINA
--
THE REPUBLICAN PLATFORM CALLS FOR THE FREEDOM AND INDEPENDENCE OF
THE REPUBLIC OF CHINA AND ITS SIXTEEN MILLION PEOPLE, AND FOR THE U.S. TO
FULFILL ITS COMMITMENTS SUCH AS THE MUTUAL DEFENSE TREATY.
-
YOU SHOULD NOTE THAT THE PLATFORM STRONGLY ENDORSED THE PROCESS OF
NORMALIZATION.
- IT DOES NOT PRESCRIBE ANY SPECIFIC WAYS TO PROCEED.
-- TAIWAN IS OBVIOUSLY ONE OF THE MAJOR ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED. THE
SHANGHAI COMMUNIQUE EMPHASIZES THE U.S. INTEREST IN A PEACEFUL SETTLEMENT
OF THE TAIWAN ISSUE BY THE CHINESE THEMSELVES.
I
WE WILL NOT ABANDON THE PEOPLE OF TAIWAN, BUT IT IS USELESS TO
SPECULATE ON THE PRECISE MANNER IN WHICH IT WILL BE WORKED OUT IN NEGOTIATIONS.
CHINA
-- THE NEW RELATIONSHIP WITH CHINA WAS ESTABLISHED BY THE SHANGHAI
COMMUNIQUE. IT PROVIDED THAT WE WOULD MOVE TOWARD NORMALIZATION AS TENSIONS
WERE REDUCED IN THE AREA.
-- WE ARE PROCEEDING ON THAT BASIS. TRADE HAS GROWN; THERE HAVE BEEN
INCREASED EXCHANGES; I HAVE VISITED PEKING.
- WE WILL PROCEED ALONG THIS LINE. THE SHANGHAI COMMUNIQUE SETS OUT
THE GOALS BUT THE TIMING AND ACTUAL PROCESS OF GETTING THERE IS TO BE THE SUBJECT
OF NEGOTIATIONS.
- THE FUTURE OF TAIWAN IS A MAJOR ISSUE. IN THE SHANGHAI COMMUNIQUE
THE U.S. "REAFFIRMED ITS INTEREST IN A PEACEFUL SETTLEMENT OF THE TAIWAN QUESTION
BY THE CHINESE THEMSELVES." THAT REMAINS THE U.S. POSITION AND WILL BE A PRINCIPAL
CONCERN IN ANY NEGOTIATIONS I CONDUCT.
-- BUT NEGOTIATIONS INVOLVE MORE THAN JUST THE U.S. AND IT WOULD NOT BE
USEFUL TO SPECULATE AHEAD OF TIME THE PRECISE MANNER IN WHICH THE ISSUE WILL BE
WORKED OUT.
Panama Canal
-- Our interest in the Canal is to assure guaranteed access and the
secure operation and defense of it.
-- The security of the Canal can never be guaranteed while there is
Panamanian hostility and the constant threat of subversion or outright
attack.
- - The best way to guarantee the security of the Canal is through negotiation
of a mutually beneficial treaty.
-- This has been the view of 4 Presidents. It was the public commitment
of President Johnson.
CARTER/MONDALE - SALT
-- AFTER THE VLADIVOSTOK MEETING SENATORS MONDALE, KENNEDY, AND
MATHIAS SPONSORED A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE AGREEMENT AND URGING ITS
COMPLETION.
-- IN MAY 1976 MONDALE VOTED WITH THE SENATE MAJORITY 86-7 URGING
CONCLUSION OF VLADIVOSTOK ACCORDS.
- - ON JULY 7 CARTER V AS ASKED WHETHER HE THOUGHT SALT I WAS GOOD
FOR THE US. HE SAID, YES, I DO."
- - ON AUGUST 31 MONDALE SAID HE WELCOMED CURRENT NEGOTIATIONS
AS A FIRST STEP TOWARDS REDUCTIONS.
THE HONOR CODE
THE HONOR CODE IS AN ESSENTIAL ELEMENT OF OUR PREPARATION FOR
THE OFFICERS OF OUR ARMED FORCES. IT IS ESSENTIAL IN TIME OF
BATTLE -- WHEN LIVES AND THE VERY SURVIVAL OF OUR NATION ARE
INVOLVED -- THAT THE WORD OF THE MEN AND WOMEN IN UNIFORM BE
UNQUESTIONABLE.
HEN THE RECENT INCIDENT AT WEST POINT BROKE TO THE PUBLIC,
THERE WAS A GREAT DEAL OF PRESSURE -- COMING IN PART FROM MEMBERS
OF THE CONGRESS -- TO JUST DISCARD THE CODE ITSELF. WE RESISTED
SUCH PRESSURES. THE HONOR CODE HAS SERVED OUR COUNTRY WELL FOR
200 YEARS, AND AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED, IT WILL NOT BE DISCARDED.
(OVER)
WHILE MAINTAINING THE HONOR CODE ITSELF, THERE IS SOME QUESTION AS
TO HOW THE CODE SHOULD BE PROPERLY ADMINISTERED. AT THE PRESENT TIME,
THE AIR FORCE ACADEMY AND THE NAVY ACADEMY ADMINISTER THEIR CODES
DIFFERENTLY FROM WEST POINT. FOR EXAMPLE, THEY DO NOT HAVE JUST ONE
SANCTION -- EXPULSION -- FOR EACH AND EVERY VIOLATION, DESPITE SUCH
DIFFERENCES, EACH SERVICE HAS PRODUCED OFFICERS OF AN EQUALLY HIGH
INTEGRITY. HENCE THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE HONOR CODE ITSELF DOES
NOT SEEM TO BE CRUCIAL IN THIS REGARD.
IN ORDER TO BEST DETERMINE THE PROPER ADMINISTRATION OF THE HONOR
CODE AT WEST POINT -- WHETHER, FOR EXAMPLE, TO MAKE IT SIMILAR TO
THOSE OF THE AIR FORCE OR NAVY -- THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY HAS ORDERED
A COMPLETE REVIEW UNDER THE ABLE LEADERSHIP OF FRANK BORMAN, THE FORMER
ASTRONAUT. I WILL AWAIT THEIR FINDINGS, ALONG WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS
OF THE CADETS THEMSELVES AND OTHERS INVOLVED. WE ARE DECIDING HOW TO
BEST ADMINISTER THE HONOR CODE.
ALL-VOLUNTEER ARMY VS, COMPULSORY NATIONAL SERVICE
1. THE ALL-VOLUNTEER ARMY IS A SUCCESS, DESPITE ALL THE PROPHETS
OF DOOM AND GLOOM.
-- THE SERVICES ARE STRONG. EVERY PERSON THERE VOLUNTEERED
TO BE THERE.
-- THERE IS NO DRAFT. AND THERE IS NO NEED FOR A DRAFT.
-- WE CAN MAINTAIN OUR PRESENT AND FUTURE FORCES BY 2.1
MILLION MORE THAN ADEQUATE WITHOUT RESORTING TO THE
DRAFT, AND 65% OF THE VOLUNTEERS ARE HIGH SCHOOL
GRADUATES.
(OVER)
2. THE CONCEPT OF COMPULSORY NATIONAL SERVICE MAY BE WELL-
INTENTIONED, BUT IS REPUGNANT.
-- My GOAL IS NOT JUST PEACE -- BUT PEACE WITH FREEDOM,
ANY FORM OF COMPULSORY SERVICE -- VIA THE DRAFT OR
OTHERWISE -- IS REPUGNANT UNLESS REQUIRED BY A
NATIONAL EMERGENCY.
-- AMERICA CAN NOT COMPEL PATRIOTISM OR GENEROSITY.
SHE CAN AND DOES INSPIRE IT IN OUR PEOPLE EVERYDAY.
REBUTTAL ON ALLIES
CARTER CHARGES: RELATIONS WITH ALLIES IN DISREPAIR.
MR. CARTER SEEMS TO BE TALKING MORE ABOUT CONDITIONS THAT
EXISTED IN THE PAST THAN THE CONDITIONS OF TODAY. IF HE WILL
TALK WITH ALLIED LEADERS -- AS I HAVE -- HE WILL FIND THAT WE
ENJOY CLOSE RELATIONS, AS SHOWN IN THE ECONOMIC SUMMITS, THE
TROOP-CUT NEGOTIATIONS, AND NEW AREAS OF COOPERATION ON ECONOMIC
ISSUES AND ENERGY ISSUES,
OUR ALLIES NO LONGER FEEL NEGLECTED; THEY NO LONGER QUESTION
THE CONSTANCY OF AMERICAN PURPOSE,
(OVER)
MR. CARTER SAYS HE IS FOR OUR ALLIES, YET HE TAKES POSITIONS
THAT WOULD INVITE A MAJOR CRISIS OF CONFIDENCE WITH ALL OUR ALLIES:
-- HE WANTS TO RETHINK OUR WHOLE NATO ALLIANCE, AND TALKS
ABOUT U.S. TROOP CUTS;
-- HE WOULD CHANGE NATO's AGREED NUCLEAR STRATEGY, SHIFTING
TO A DANGEROUS "MASSIVE RETALIATION" STRATEGY INSTEAD OF
THE AGREED POLICY "FLEXIBLE RESPONSE."
-- HE WOULD WITHDRAW OUR TROOPS FROM SOUTH KOREA, WHICH WOULD
RISK JAPAN'S SECURITY.
ALL OF THIS HAS BEEN VERY UNSETTLING TO OUR ALLIES,
LATIN AMERICA
-- WE HAVE SEEN THE FOLLY OF IMPOSING OUR OWN IDEAS ON LATIN
AMERICA;
-- IN THE 1960's WE SIMPLY THREW MONEY -- $15 BILLION -- AT THE
PROBLEM AND CAUSED MASSIVE RESENTMENT. THE RESULT WAS DISILLUSION-
MENT AND MISTRUST;
-- MY ADMINISTRATION HAS ATTACKED THE REAL POLITICAL AND
ECONOMIC ISSUES;
-- WE NOW LISTEN TO THE IDEAS OF LATIN AMERICA AND TALK AS
EQUAL;
-- LAST JUNE AT THE ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES WE
(OVER)
PROPOSED:
NEW MECHANISMS TO INCREASE TRADE;
NEW PROGRAMS TO MAKE OUR TECHNOLOGY AVAILABLE TO
LATIN AMERICA;
STRONG SUPPORT FOR THE COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS;
REFORM OF THE OAS.
-- IN THIS WAY WE OFFER TRUE COOPERATION AS EQUALS NOT
PATERNALISM OF THE PAST.
POPULATION CONTROL
WE ARE WINNING THE WORLDWIDE FIGHT AGAINST EXCESSIVE POPULATION
GROWTH. IN THE LAST TEN YEARS, THE U.S. HAS SPENT CLOSE TO ONE
BILLION DOLLARS TO COMBAT THIS PROBLEM. THIS HELP HAS BEEN
EFFECTIVE. THE BIRTH RATE HAS FALLEN IN EAST ASIA AND CENTRAL
AMERICA. INDIA IS NOW MAKING PROGRESS. IN AFRICA, PROGRESS IS
JUST BEGINNING.
IN TEN MORE YEARS, AT OUR PRESENT RATE OF EFFORT, THE PROBLEM
SHOULD BE, TO A GREAT EXTENT, UNDER CONTROL, WE HAVE GIVEN ABOUT
60 PERCENT OF THE AID FROM DEVELOPED COUNTRIES IN THIS FIELD.
(SINCE 1973 WE HAVE GIVEN NO AID FOR ABORTION. OUR AID GOES
FOR BIRTH CONTROL AND EDUCATION.)
(OVER)
THE WORLD POPULATION PROBLEM IS A HUMANITARIAN PROBLEM.
-- WILL THERE BE ENOUGH FOOD?
-- WILL ALL CHILDREN OF THE WORLD HAVE PROPER MEDICAL CARE?
-- WILL THEY IN FACT SURVIVE THEIR CHILDHOOD?
No NATION HAS SHOWN AS MUCH COMPASSION IN DEALING WITH THESE
PROBLEMS. No NATION HAS DONE AS MUCH TO SOLVE THEM.
EVERY AMERICAN SHOULD BE PROUD OF OUR EFFORTS,
REBUTTAL ON POPULATION CONTROL
OUR AID HAS BEEN GENEROUS -- ABOUT 60 PERCENT OF THE TOTAL
GIVEN BY DEVELOPED NATIONS.
THERE IS NO CONTRADICTION BETWEEN OUR AID GIVEN TO FAMILY
PLANNING ABROAD AND THE PRESIDENT'S POSITION ON ABORTION -- U.S.
FUNDS HAVE NOT BEEN USED TO SUPPORT ABORTION SINCE 1973.
FOOD POLICY
WORLD FOOD PRODUCTION IS RAPIDLY RISING, SINCE 1967 FOOD
PRODUCTION HAS BEEN GOING UP FASTER THAN POPULATION, BUT THERE IS
STILL ENORMOUS UNMET NEED. FIRST WORLD FOOD CONFERENCE WAS HELD
AT MY INITIATIVE IN FALL OF 1974. OUR POLICY IS TWOFOLD:
1. A LONG-RANGE POLICY TO GIVE THE POORER COUNTRIES THE
TECHNOLOGICAL KNOW-HOW TO FEED THEMSELVES,
2. AN IMMEDIATE POLICY TO HELP MEET PRESSING FOOD SHORTAGES
IN SOME COUNTRIES, LONG-RANGE, WE ARE HELPING DEVELOP AGRI-
CULTURAL TECHNOLOGY THROUGH OUR FOREIGN AID PROGRAM. ALSO, WE
ARE PRESSING FOR AN INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM OF GRAIN RESERVES,
WE ALSO HAVE PROPOSED AN INTERNATIONAL FUND FOR AGRICULTURAL
DEVELOPMENT. CHIEF BOTTLENECK IS GETTING PARTICIPATION FROM
OPEC COUNTRIES.
(OVER)
To MEET IMMEDIATE NEEDS, WE ARE NOW PROVIDING SUBSTANTIAL
FOOD AID. IN FISCAL 1976, WE GAVE SIX MILLION TONS OF FOOD WORTH
ONE AND ONE HALF BILLION TO NATIONS WITH SERIOUS FOOD PROBLEMS.
TERRORISM
-- THERE IS ONLY ONE POLICY THAT WORKS SUCCESSFULLY AGAINST
TERRORISM: TO BE TOUGH AND AGGRESSIVE. Two COUNTRIES HAVE ADOPTED
THAT APPROACH -- ISRAEL AND THE UNITED STATES -- AND IN BOTH WE
HAVE ACHIEVED NOTABLE SUCCESS, IN THE U.S., THERE HAS BEEN ONLY
ONE CASE OF SKYJACKING IN THE PAST TWO YEARS, AND IT FAILED. TOUGH,
AGGRESSIVE POLICIES ARE THE BEST APPROACH HERE AND ELSEWHERE,
-- THE UN IS IN A UNIQUE POSITION AND SHOULD TACKLE THE PROBLEM
OF INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM HEAD ON,
-- WE INTRODUCED A DRAFT CONVENTION TO THE UN GENERAL ASSEMBLY
TO PREVENT THE SPREAD OF TERRORIST VIOLENCE.
(OVER)
-- LAST SUMMER AFTER THE DRAMATICALLY SUCCESSFUL ISRAELI RAID
AT ENTEBEE, THE U.S. AND GREAT BRITAIN INTRODUCED A RESOLUTION
IN THE SECURITY COUNCIL CALLING UPON ALL COUNTRIES TO TAKE EVERY
NECESSARY MEASURE TO PREVENT AND PUNISH TERRORIST ACTS.
-- WE WILL WORK WITH OUR ALLIES AND FRIENDS TO:
EXCHANGE INTELLIGENCE
TEACH TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF PREVENTING TERRORISM
-- SECRETARY KISSINGER AT THE UN LAST WEEK EMPHASIZED OUR DETER-
MINATION TO PROCEED UNILATERALLY IF MULTINATIONAL ACTION IS NOT
FORTHCOMING,
(MORE)
TERRORISM, CONT'D
UNILATERAL
-- I HAVE ORDERED MAXIMUM SECURITY AT US AIRPORTS, THIS LED TO
A MARKED REDUCTION IN HIJACKING ATTEMPTS IN US.
-- (THE HIJACKING OF THE TWA PLANE DID NOT IN FACT CARRY WEAPONS
ONTO THE AIRCRAFT AND THIS CERTAINLY WAS A MAJOR FACTOR IN THE
SUCCESSFUL CONCLUSIONS OF THAT HIJACKING.)
-- I HAVE ESTABLISHED A SPECIAL TASK FORCE COMBINING FBI, FAA,
STATE, DEFENSE AND OTHERS TO DEAL WITH:
CRISES MANAGEMENT, AND
PROMOTING FIRM CONTROLS INTERNATIONALLY.
-- I HAVE INCREASED THE SECURITY OF OUR MISSIONS OVERSEAS.
ARAB BOYCOTT/DISCRIMINATION
I HAVE TAKEN THE STRONGEST ACTION AGAINST THE BOYCOTT AND
DISCRIMINATION OF ANY PRESIDENT SINCE ISRAEL WAS FOUNDED.
-- NEARLY A YEAR AGO I DIRECTED THE COMMERCE DEPARTMENT AND
ALL FEDERAL AGENCIES TO PROHIBIT COMPLIANCE WITH DISCRIMINA-
TORY PRACTICES IN FOREIGN TRADE.
-- THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT HAS LAUNCHED THE FIRST ANTI-TRUST SUIT
IN A MAJOR BOYCOTT CASE,
-- I SIGNED THE TAX BILL, WHICH HAD SEVERE PENALTIES AGAINST
U.S. FIRMS THAT PARTICIPATE IN THE BOYCOTT OR DISCRIMINATION.
(OVER)
BUT BEYOND THIS WE HAVE SEEN IN CONGRESS MEASURES THAT ARE
so ONE-SIDED THAT THEY WILL UNDERMINE OUR MEDIATING ROLE IN THE
MIDDLE EAST AND PRACTICALLY INVITE THE SOVIETS TO REESTABLISH
THEMSELVES IN THE ARAB WORLD,
IT'S AN EFFECTIVE BID FOR VOTES BUT IT'S NOT IN THE NATIONAL
INTEREST OF THE UNITED STATES OR IN THE INTEREST OF PEACE IN THE
MIDDLE EAST,
A POLITICIAN CAN TELL YOU WHAT YOU WANT TO HEAR; A PRESIDENT
HAS TO TELL YOU THE FACTS,
NUCLEAR WAR REBUTTAL
MR. CARTER HAS SAID THAT IF WE USE EVEN A SINGLE NUCLEAR
WEAPON WHEN ATTACKED IN EUROPE THAT THERE WOULD BE AN IMMEDIATE
ESCALATION INTO AN ALL-OUT NUCLEAR WAR,
THIS IS AN EXTREMELY DANGEROUS VIEW. IT IS A MAJOR CHALLENGE
TO THE MILITARY STRATEGY OF THE ATLANTIC ALLIANCE WHICH HAS BEEN
CAREFULLY WORKED OUT BY THE PAST THREE ADMINISTRATIONS. MR.
CARTER'S POSITION AMOUNTS TO A VIRTUAL GUARANTEE TO THE SOVIETS
THAT THEY COULD LAUNCH AN ATTACK IN EUROPE AND THAT THE ONLY
CHOICE FOR THE UNITED STATES MIGHT BE DEFEAT OR MASSIVE
RETALIATION.
(OVER)
I STRONGLY DISAGREE WITH THIS VIEWPOINT. OUR TACTICAL
NUCLEAR WEAPONS IN EUROPE ARE CRITICAL TO DETERRING AGGRESSION.
SECOND, THEY GIVE THE ALLIANCE THE CAPABILITY TO MEET ATTACK AT
WHATEVER LEVEL THEY ARE LAUNCHED.
I WILL NOT CREATE A CRISIS IN THE WESTERN ALLIANCE BY SUGGESTING
WE WOULD WITHHOLD OUR NUCLEAR DETERRENT UNLESS THE UNITED STATES
ITSELF WAS ATTACKED.
RELATIONS WITH ALLIES
RELATIONS WITH OUR ALLIES HAVE NEVER BEEN BETTER. WHEN I
CAME INTO OFFICE, I FOUND THAT OUR ALLIES IN EUROPE AND ASIA
QUESTIONED WHETHER WE HAD LOST OUR WILL, OUR STEADFASTNESS OF
PURPOSE, ALL THAT HAS CHANGED:
-- I HAVE MET SEVERAL TIMES WITH ALL OUR ALLIED LEADERS, THEY
NOW HAVE CONFIDENCE IN OUR POLICY.
-- THE ECONOMIC SUMMITS (RAMBOUILLET, NOVEMBER 1975; PUERTO
RICO, JUNE 1976) WERE A MILESTONE. COOPERATION NOW EXTENDS
BEYOND DEFENSE TO COOPERATION ON ECONOMIC AND ENERGY POLICY.
-- WE HAVE BEEFED UP NATO DEFENSES.
(OVER)
-- OUR COOPERATION WITH FRANCE IS CLOSER THAN BEFORE,
-- SPAIN AND PORTUGAL, ONCE THOUGHT TO BE ON THE BRINK OF
CHAOS, ARE MOVING STEADILY TOWARD DEMOCRACY,
-- WE HAVE A COMMON POSITION IN THE EAST-WEST TALKS ON TROOP
CUTS.
-- I WAS THE FIRST AMERICAN PRESIDENT TO VISIT JAPAN.
-- My BASIC PRINCIPLE THAT WE STAND BY ALL ALLIES -- ISRAEL,
KOREA, IRAN, AS WELL AS OUR NATO ALLIES AND JAPAN -- BECAUSE
IF WE FAIL TO STAND FIRM IN ANY SINGLE PLACE, WE UNDERMINE
THE CONFIDENCE OF OUR ALLIES AND ONLY HEARTEN OUR ADVERSARIES.
REBUTTAL ON SECRECY CHARGE
CARTER CHARGE: FOREIGN POLICY UNDER HAK HAS BEEN CONDUCTED UNDER
A CLOAK OF SECRECY, LEADING TO MISTAKES IN VIETNAM, CAMBODIA,
ANGOLA, CIA, ETC.
1. GOVERNOR CARTER HAS MADE A HABIT DURING THIS CAMPAIGN OF
RUNNING AGINST MANY OF THE GHOSTS OF THE PAST, ALONG WITH MANY
OF THE SINS OF THE PAST. I WOULD REMIND HIM THAT THIS RACE IS ONLY
BETWEEN THE TWO OF US -- AND WHAT THE VOTERS MUST DECIDE IS WHICH
OF US WILL DO A BETTER JOB OF KEEPING AMERICA STRONG AND AT PEACE,
THIS IS THE OVERRIDING ISSUE THAT WE OUGHT TO ADDRESS TONIGHT.
(OVER)
2. As TO THIS RED HERRING ABOUT SECRECY, LET ME SAY THAT MY
RECORD ON FOREIGN POLICY IS THERE FOR ALL TO SEE:
-- THERE ARE NO SECRET DEALS,
-- WE HAVE HELD AN UNPRECEDENTED NUMBER OF MEETINGS WITH
THE CONGRESS TO KEEP THEM INFORMED.
-- WE HAVE BEEN AS CANDID AND OPEN AS POSSIBLE. FOR
EXAMPLE, AFTER THE SINAI AGREEMENT WAS REACHED, WE TURNED OVER
THE DOCUMENTS FROM THOSE NEGOTIATIONS TO THE FOREIGN POLICY
COMMITTEES OF THE CONGRESS,
(MORE)
REBUTTAL ON SECRECY CHARGE, CONT'D
3. I WILL SAY THAT THERE ARE TIMES WHEN DIPLOMACY CANNOT
BE CONDUCTED FULLY IN THE OPEN. FOR EXAMPLE, NEGOTIATIONS WITH
OUR ALLIES OR OUR ADVERSARIES ON ARMS REDUCTIONS, INVOLVE WEAPONS
SYSTEMS THAT DEFEND OUR VERY SECURITY. MR. CARTER MAY BELIEVE
THAT SUCH NEGOTIATIONS CAN BE CONDUCTED IN THE OPEN, BUT I DON'T
AND AS LONG AS I AM PRESIDENT, SENSITIVE INFORMATION ABOUT THE
MILITARY SECURITY OF THIS COUNTRY WILL REMAIN CLASSIFIED.
(OVER)
4. MR. CARTER COMPLAINS ABOUT SECRET DIPLOMACY ON THE
ONE HAND AND THEN, ON THE OTHER HAND, PROPOSES "UNPUBLICIZED"
NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE SOVIETS ON THE MIDDLE EAST. HE CAN'T HAVE
IT BOTH WAYS.
FOREIGN LEADERS QUOTES
PRIME MINISTER COSGRAVE OF IRELAND
"
THE TIES THAT WERE FORGED BETWEEN US IN THE
EARLY YEARS HAVE NOT LESSENED WITH TIME. ON THE
CONTRARY, I BELIEVE THEY ARE TODAY STRONGER AND
FIRMER THAN EVER. 11
REMARKS ON SOUTH GROUNDS,
MARCH 17, 1976
(OVER)
PRESIDENT GISCARD d'ESTAING OF FRANCE
"I DO NOT THINK THERE HAS EVER BEEN A TIME WHEN
CONTACTS BETWEEN OUR TWO GOVERNMENTS HAVE BEEN
MORE FREQUENT, CONSULTATION MORE SUSTAINED AND
COOPERATION MORE GOOD WILLED. "
WHITE HOUSE TOAST,
MAY 17, 1976
QUEEN ELIZABETH II OF GREAT BRITAIN
"MR. PRESIDENT, THE BRITISH AND AMERICAN PEOPLE
ARE AS CLOSE TODAY AS TWO PEOPLES HAVE EVER BEEN.
(MORE)
-2-
WE SEE YOU AS OUR STRONG AND TRUSTED FRIEND, AND WE
BELIEVE THAT YOU, IN TURN, WILL FIND US READY AS EVER
TO BEAR OUR FULL SHARE IN DEFENDING THE VALUES IN
WHICH WE BOTH BELIEVE."
REMARKS ON SOUTH GROUNDS,
JULY 7, 1976
CHANCELLOR SCHMIDT OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY
"I DON' T THINK I AM EXAGGERATING WHEN I SAY THAT AT
NO TIME DURING THE PAST 30 YEARS HAVE THE RELATIONS BETWEEN
(OVER)
OUR COUNTRIES BEEN CLOSER AND HAS BEEN COOPERATION
BETWEEN OUR TWO GOVERNMENTS MORE TRUSTFUL AND
DIRECT THAN TODAY."
WHITE HOUSE TOAST,
JULY 15, 1976
PRESIDENT KEKKONEN OF FINLAND
"WE, IN FINLAND, REALIZE VERY WELL THE ENORMOUS
RESPONSIBILITY WHICH THE UNITED STATES AS A GREAT POWER
BEARS IN SOLVING INTERNATIONAL PROBLEMS. MR. PRESIDENT,
YOUR ACTIVE CONDUCT OF FOREIGN POLICY AND YOUR EFFORTS
(MORE)
-3-
TO SOLVE THESE PROBLEMS IN AN EQUITABLE MANNER
DEPENDABLY AND HONESTLY ARE RESPECTED ALL OVER THE
WORLD."
REMARKS ON SOUTH GROUNDS,
AUGUST 3, 1976
SECRETARY GENERAL LUNS OF NATO
"FIRST OF ALL, THE SITUATION IN THE UNITED STATES
ITSELF, ALL OF THE ALLIES HAVE NOTED THE IMPROVEMENT
IN THE ECONOMIC POSTURE OF THE UNITED STATES, WHICH
(OVER)
WELL COMPARES TO NEARLY ALL THE ALLIES. SECONDLY, IF
I MAY USE THE WORD, THE RECOVERY FROM THE SENSE OF
DISAFFECTION WHICH YOU FELT TWO OR THREE YEARS AGO
IN THE UNITED STATES AND THE FACT THAT THE BICENTENNIAL
WAS SUCH A SIGNAL OF SUCCESS AND THIS COUNTRY HAS
REGAINED ITS UNITY OF PURPOSE.
"THEN, OF COURSE, THE VOICES WHICH WERE so LOUD
TWO OR THREE YEARS AGO ABOUT WITHDRAWING TROOPS OF
THE UNITED STATES FROM EUROPE HAVE BECOME VERY
(MORE)
-4-
MUTED INDEED, AND THE UNITED STATES' COMMITMENT TO THE
DEFENSE OF THE UNITED STATES AND THE WHOLE ALLIANCE ON
THE FIRST LINE IN EUROPE HAS BEEN UNDERLINED BY THE FACT
THAT TWO COMBAT BRIGADES HAVE BEEN ADDED TO THE
STRENGTH OF THE ALLIED TROOPS IN GERMANY."
WHITE HOUSE PRESS CONFERENCE,
SEPTEMBER 15, 1976
WHO RUNS FOREIGN POLICY: KISSINGER OR FORD
THIS IS A SUBJECT THAT HAS ATTRACTED FAR MORE HEAT THAN LIGHT,
LET ME TRY TO SHED SOME LIGHT ON IT.
DR. KISSINGER HAPPENS TO BE A SUPERB INTERNATIONAL NEGOTIATOR --
THE BEST IN THE WORLD, so FAR AS I CAN TELL. AND IT HAS BEEN IN
THAT ROLE THAT HE HAS NEGOTIATED THE TERMS OF MANY, MANY INTERNA-
TIONAL AGREEMENTS -- FROM THE SALT AGREEMENT IN THE LAST ADMINIS-
TRATION TO THE SINAI ACCORD AND THE AFRICAN AGREEMENT IN THIS
ADMINISTRATION. IN THIS ROLE, HE HAS MADE AN OUTSTANDING
CONTRIBUTION TO AMERICA AND TO THE CAUSE OF PEACE, WE SHOULD
ALL BE GRATEFUL TO HIM.
(OVER)
BUT I DON'T NEED TO TELL YOU WHERE THE FINAL RESPONSIBILITY
RESTS FOR DECISIONS SHAPING THE OVERALL DIRECTION AND THRUST OF
AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY, THAT RESPONSIBILITY RESTS IN THE OVAL OFFICE;
IT HAS BEEN THERE IN THE PAST AND IT REMAINS THERE TODAY. IT IS THE
PRESIDENT -- AND ONLY THE PRESIDENT -- WHO CAN DECIDE WHERE TO SEND
OUR TROOPS, WHO CAN DECIDE HOW MANY MISSILES AND BOMBERS AND SHIPS WE
NEED TO PROTECT OUR SECURITY, AND WHO CAN DECIDE WHETHER THE MOMENT
OF TRUTH HAS ARRIVED IN THE NUCLEAR AGE. THAT IS NEVER AN EASY
REAPONSIBILITY, BUT IT IS ONE THAT I WELCOME,
IF ELECTED, MR. CARTER WILL BE THE FIRST PRESIDENT IN THIS CENTURY
WITH VIRTUALLY NO FOREIGN AND DEFENSE POLICY EXPERIENCE. THEREFORE,
I BELIEVE HE SHOULD TELL THE PEOPLE -- IN THIS DEBATE -- WHO HIS
SECRETARY OF STATE AND SECRETARY OF DEFENSE WILL BE, THE PEOPLE
HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW WHO WILL BE RUNNING THE COUNTRY'S FOREIGN AND
DEFENSE POLICIES,
MORALITY CAMERICAN VALUES)
WE HEAR A LOT OF TALK ABOUT MORALITY. I BELIEVE:
-- PUSHING BACK THE SPECTER OF NUCLEAR WAR, AS WE HAVE DONE
IN SALT, IS A MORAL POLICY;
-- MEDIATING CONFLICT, AS WE HAVE DONE IN THE MIDDLE EAST,
IS A MORAL POLICY,
-- - AVERTING RACE WAR AND PROMOTING RECONCILIATION, AS WE HAVE
DONE IN AFRICA, IS A MORAL POLICY.
-- - ORGANIZING WORLD COOPERATION TO PROMOTE FOOD PRODUCTION
AND ECONOMIC PROGRESS IN POORER COUNTRIES, IS A MORAL POLICY.
-- INSURING THE SOLIDARITY OF OUR ALLIANCES, FOR THE SURVIVAL
OF DEMOCRACY, IS A MORAL POLICY,
(OVER)
-- STANDING LOYALLY BY ALLIES WHO SEEK TO DEFEND THEMSELVES
AGAINST AGGRESSION IS A MORAL POLICY,
-- AND, FINALLY, KEEPING THE PEACE -- SAVING LIVES -- IS VERY
MORAL.
I THINK EVERY AMERICAN CAN BE PROUD OF WHAT THIS COUNTRY HAS DONE --
FOR PEACE, FOR FREEDOM, FOR PROGRESS, FOR JUSTICE. I AM SICK AND
TIRED OF HEARING OUR COUNTRY DENOUNCED AS IMMORAL BY PEOPLE WHO
CLEARLY DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT.
CONTINUATION OF NIXON-HAK FOREIGN POLICY
ISSUE: IMPACT OF GRF UPON FOREIGN POLICY INHERITED FROM RN-HAK,
1. IN EARLY DAYS OF MY ADMINISTRATION, I MADE A CONSCIOUS
EFFORT TO CARRY FORWARD THE GREAT FOREIGN POLICY TRADITIONS OF THE
POST-WAR ERA:
-- IT WAS URGENT THAT OUR FRIENDS AND ALLIES UNDERSTOOD
THAT AMERICA WOULD REMAIN THE STRONGEST PEACEMAKER IN THE WORLD,
WE HAVE ENDED THEIR FEARS. (FOR EXAMPLE, I CALLED NATO AMBAS-
SADORS IN FOR A MEETING THE DAY I TooK OFFICE TO REASSURE THEM
THAT AMERICA WOULD BE STEADFAST IN ITS COMMITMENTS.)
(OVER)
-- IT WAS EQUALLY URGENT THAT OUR ADVERSARIES UNDERSTAND
THAT U.S. FOREIGN POLICY WAS NOT GOING TO BREAK DOWN IN THE
MIDST OF A CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS. IT WAS A TIME OF GREAT
TESTING FOR US. EVERY NEW PRESIDENT IS ALWAYS TESTED BY THE
SOVIETS; JFK WAS TESTED BY KHRUSCHEV IN VIENNA AND IF MR. CARTER
IS ELECTED, HE WILL BE SEVERELY TESTED. I FELT THAT IN THOSE
EARLY DAYS IT WAS VITAL TO STAND FIRM WITH THE SOVIETS; WE DID
THAT, AND I AM NOW BEYOND TESTING INTO A PERIOD OF MUTUAL
RESPECT AND PROGRESS,
2. So CONTINUITY WAS IMPORTANT IN EARLY DAYS, BUT SINCE THAT
TIME, WE HAVE MOVED VIGOROUSLY ON SEVERAL FRONTS WHERE NEW PROGRESS
AND NEW INITIATIVES SEEMED POSSIBLE, AND WE'VE MADE STRIKING
BREAKTHROUGHS:
(MORE)
CONTINUATION OF NIXON-HAK FOREIGN POLICY, CONT'D
-- NEW ACCORDS IN THE MIDDLE EAST;
-- NEW AGREEMENTS IN SOUTHERN AFRICA;
-- COORDINATED ATTACK ON WORLDWIDE RECESSION LED BY
U.S.;
-- NEW U. S. PROPOSALS TO MEET FUTURE FOOD NEEDS, ASSIST
DEVELOPING NATIONS,
EACH OF THESE REPRESENTS A FORD ADMINISTRATION INITIATIVE
AND A FORD ADMINISTRATION BREAKTHROUGH. EACH HAS FURTHERED THE
CAUSE OF PEACE.
FORD RECORD
I TooK OFFICE IN A CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS AT HOME. THE WORLD
WAS WATCHING TO SEE IF WE COULD RECOVER OUR SELF-CONFIDENCE AND
REMAIN THE WORLD'S LEADER. WE HAVE DONE IT.
-- FOR THE FIRST TIME SINCE EISENHOWER, AN AMERICAN PRESIDENT
CAN SEEK ELECTION AND SAY WE ARE AT PEACE,
-- WE HAVE REVERSED THE DANGEROUS TREND OF SHRINKING DEFENSE
BUDGETS.
-- OUR ECONOMY HAS LED THE WORLD OUT OF ECONOMIC RECESSION.
-- WE HAVE STRENGTHENED OUR ALLIANCES -- IN MY NATO AND
ECONOMIC SUMMIT MEETINGS.
(OVER)
-- WE ACHIEVED A BREAKTHROUGH IN STRATEGIC ARMS LIMITS AT MY
MEETINGS WITH GENERAL SECRETARY BREZHNEV IN VLADIVOSTOK.
-- - I VISITED CHINA AND CONFIRMED THE DURABILITY OF OUR NEW
RELATIONSHIP.
-- WE REACHED A MILESTONE SINAI AGREEMENT IN THE MIDDLE EAST.
-- WE HAVE UNDERTAKEN A CRUCIAL ROLE OF MEDIATION IN SOUTHERN
AFRICA TO END CRISIS AND RACIAL WAR.
-- WE HAVE BEGUN A NEW RELATIONSHIP WITH THE DEVELOPING COUNTRIES.
-- AT THE UN WE HAVE SPOKEN OUT FORCEFULLY FOR FAIRNESS AND
JUSTICE IN THAT ORGANIZATION.
FOREIGN POLICY GOALS
1. My OVERRIDING GOAL IS THAT FOUR YEARS FROM NOW, AS I
PREPARE TO LEAVE PUBLIC OFFICE, AMERICA WILL STILL BE AT PEACE AND
AMERICA WILL STILL HAVE THE STRENGTH AND THE WILL TO KEEP THE PEACE.
2. I CAN ASSURE YOU THAT WE WILL SERIOUSLY JEOPARDIZE OUR
HOPES FOR PEACE:
-- IF WE BEGIN DISMANTLING OUR MILITARY FORCES;
-- IF WE BEGIN PRECIPITOUS WITHDRAWALS FROM KEY AREAS SUCH
AS KOREA AND EUROPE; AND,
-- IF WE SEW DOUBT AND MISUNDERSTANDINGS THROUGH FUZZY OR
CONTRADICTORY STATEMENTS ABOUT OUR INTENTIONS. THE WORLD IS
STILL TOO DANGEROUS AND HOSTILE TO PLACE OUR FUTURE IN THE HANDS
OF THOSE WHO MIGHT WAVER OR BLINK WHEN WE'RE EYEBALL-TO-EYEBALL
WITH THE RUSSIANS.
(OVER)
3. THROUGH STEADY, SKILLFUL DIPLOMACY AND THROUGH CONTINUED
MILITARY STRENGTH, THE U.S. HAS GREAT OPPORTUNITIES IN THE NEXT
FOUR YEARS:
-- WE CAN REACH SOUND AGREEMENTS TO REDUCE THE ARMS RACE;
-- WE CAN RESOLVE THE TENSIONS THAT STILL EXIST IN THE
MIDDLE EAST AND AFRICA;
-- WE CAN PROVIDE CONTINUED LEADERSHIP TO SOLVE THE WORLD'S
ECONOMIC TROUBLES; AND,
-- WE CAN CONTINUE AT THE FOREFRONT OF EFFORTS TO PROVIDE
ENOUGH FOOD, ENOUGH ENERGY AND ENOUGH SECURITY FOR THE POORER
NATIONS TO MEET THEIR PEOPLE'S NEEDS.
(MORE)
FOREIGN POLICY GOALS, CONT'D
IF WE MOVE STEADILY TOWARD THESE GOALS, WE WILL GREATLY
ENHANCE THE PROSPECTS FOR PEACE THROUGH NOT ONLY THE END OF THE
DECADE BUT THROUGH THE END OF THE CENTURY AND BEYOND.
REBUTTAL TO CARTER ON MIDDLE EAST
I WELCOME MR. CARTER'S EVIDENT DESIRE TO ACHIEVE A LASTING
PEACE IN THE MIDDLE EAST AND HIS COMMITMENT TO THE SECURITY OF
ISRAEL. LITTLE OF WHAT HE SAYS IS INCONSISTENT WITH CURRENT
ADMINISTRATION POLICY, EXCEPT ON THESE POINTS:
-- FIRST, HE SEEMS WILLING TO DICTATE TO ISRAEL THEIR FINAL
BORDERS WITH THE ARAB STATES. FOR EXAMPLE, HE HAS SAID ISRAEL
SHOULD WITHDRAW TO THE 1967 BORDERS BUT KEEP THE GOLAN HEIGHTS
AND CONTROL OVER JEWISH AND CHRISTIAN HOLY PLACES IN JERUSALEM.
WE BELIEVE THAT TERMS SHOULD NOT BE DICTATED BY THE U.S. OR
ANY OTHER OUTSIDER BUT SHOULD BE DETERMINED BY THE PARTIES
THEMSELVES.
(OVER)
-- SECOND, HE APPARENTLY WANTS TO INVITE THE SOVIETS INTO
EVERY NEGOTIATION AND HAS EVEN TALKED ABOUT A SECRETLY NEGOTIATED
U.S.-SOVIET PLAN FOR DICTATING A FINAL SOLUTION FOR THE MIDDLE
EAST. ANYONE FAMILIAR WITH THE SOVIET RECORD IN THE MIDDLE
EAST MUST BE TROUBLED BY MR. CARTER'S SUGGESTIONS; I KNOW
THAT I AM, AND I DO NOT ACCEPT THEM,
THE COUNTRIES OF THE MIDDLE EAST ARE CLOSER TO A JUST AND
LASTING PEACE THAN AT ANY TIME IN SEVERAL YEARS; THAT IS DUE IN
PART TO THEIR OWN WISDOM AND IN PART TO THE VERY CONSTRUCTIVE POLI-
CIES OF THE UNITED STATES. I INTEND TO MAINTAIN THOSE POLICIES
AND PRESS FORWARD IN THE SEARCH FOR AN END TO TENSIONS AND
HOSTILITY.
ILLEGAL FOREIGN PAYMENTS
BRIBERY ABROAD IS CONTRARY TO AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY
INTERESTS AND TO THE ECONOMIC AND ETHICAL PRINCIPLES FOR
WHICH WE STAND.
THE PROBLEM WITH THE DIRECT "CRIMINALIZATION" LEGISLATION
(WHICH PASSED THE SENATE), HOWEVER, IS THAT, WHILE IT SEEMS
ATTRACTIVE, IT IS -- IN THE OPINION OF VIRTUALLY ALL EXPERTS
WHO HAVE EXAMINED THIS ISSUE -- ESSENTIALLY UNENFORCEABLE.
IT WOULD REQUIRE ACCESS TO FOREIGN WITNESSES AND FOREIGN
RECORDS WHICH WOULD REMAIN BEYOND THE REACH OF U.S. LAW.
(OVER)
THE ONLY WORKABLE WAY TO GET AT THIS PROBLEM IS THROUGH
AN INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENT. IN MARCH, WE PROPOSED SUCH
AN AGREEMENT TO THE U.N. I AM PLEASED TO NOTE THAT OUR
PROPOSAL HAS BEEN RECEIVED FAVORABLY -- AND THAT AN
INTERNATIONAL WORKING GROUP IS SCHEDULED TO BEGIN THE
WORK ESSENTIAL TO THE DRAFTING OF A TREATY. THE FIRST
MEETING OF THIS INTERNATIONAL WORKING GROUP WILL BE HELD
IN NEW YORK ON MONDAY (OCTOBER 11).
(MORE)
-2-
AS REGARDS UNILATERAL LEGISLATIVE ACTION BY THE UNITED
STATES, I HAVE PROPOSED "DISCLOSURE" LEGISLATION WHICH
WOULD REQUIRE REPORTING OF FOREIGN PAYMENTS. THIS
LEGISLATION IS ENFORCEABLE AND IS BASED ON THE NOTION
BEST ARTICULATED BY JUSTICE BRANDEIS: THAT "SUNSHINE
IS THE BEST DISINFECTANT." I REGRET THAT THE CONGRESS
DID NOT HOLD HEARINGS ON OUR PROPOSED LEGISLATION.
WHILE AWAITING CONGRESSIONAL ACTION -- AND INDEED
THEREAFTER -- WE WILL CONTINUE TO PURSUE THE
VIGOROUS ENFORCEMENT OF CURRENT LAW THROUGH THE
(OVER)
SEC, THE IRS AND THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE.
REBUTTAL ON KOREA
-- WE MUST REMEMBER THAT KOREA IS SURROUNDED BY HOSTILE
POWERS - NORTH KOREA, THE SOVIET UNION AND CHINA. IT FACES
SUBVERSION AND HALF A MILLION MEN ON ITS BORDERS,
-- THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN KOREA DOES NOT MEET OUR
STANDARDS, AND I HAVE MADE IT CLEAR TO PRESIDENT PARK THAT I
NEITHER APPROVE NOR CONDONE SOME PRACTICES THERE. BUT I ALSO
THINK WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND HOSTILE ENVIRONMENT IN WHICH THAT
COUNTRY EXISTS.
-- WE SHOULD NOT WITHDRAW OUR TROOPS, CUT OFF OUR MILITARY
AID, OR BLACKMAIL KOREAN GOVERNMENT BECAUSE IT DOES NOT LIVE UP
TO OUR STANDARDS,
(OVER)
-- KOREA IN HOSTILE HANDS WOULD THREATEN JAPAN. ASIANS
WILL LOSE FAITH IN OUR RELIABILITY IF WE FAIL TO LIVE UP TO
COMMITMENTS IN KOREA.
-- CARTER'S WITHDRAWAL PLEDGES WILL UNDERMINE THE STABILITY
ON THE PENINSULA AND SECURITY THROUGHOUT ASIA.
-- TROOP REDUCTIONS ANYWHERE SHOULD BE RESULTS OF MUTUAL
NEGOTIATIONS. IT IS A SIGN OF INEXPERIENCE FOR MR. CARTER TO
SUGGEST UNILATERAL WITHDRAWAL BECAUSE THIS OBVIOUSLY WEAKENS OUR
ABILITY TO NEGOTIATE MUTUAL REDUCTIONS.
U.S. AND THE MIDDLE EAST
1. THE MIDDLE EAST IS A FOCAL POINT OF OUR FOREIGN POLICY
FOR THREE MAJOR REASONS:
-- STRATEGICALLY, IT IS AT A CROSSROADS OF THE WORLD;
-- ECONOMICALLY, IT SITS ATOP THE LARGEST KNOWN SUPPLY
OF PETROLEUM IN THE WORLD;
-- AND, MORALLY, WE ARE COMMITTED TO THE SURVIVAL AND
SECURITY OF ISRAEL.
(OVER)
2. FOUR TIMES IN THE PAST QUARTER CENTURY, THE ARABS AND
ISRAELIS HAVE GONE TO WAR, A MAJOR PREOCCUPATION OF MY ADMINIS-
TRATION HAS BEEN TO REDUCE THE TENSIONS AND ACHIEVE A JUST AND
LASTING PEACE, OUR APPROACH -- STEP-BY-STEP DIPLOMACY -- HAS
PAID OFF:
-- EGYPTIAN-ISRAELI DISENGAGEMENT AGREEMENT OF JANUARY, 1974;
-- SYRIA-ISRAELI AGREEMENT OF MAY, 1974;
-- EGYPTIAN-ISRAELI SINAI AGREEMENT OF SEPTEMBER, 1975.
NOT ONLY HAS THIS KEPT THE PEACE, BUT SOVIET INFLUENCE IN
MOST OF THE AREA -- AS RABIN HAS SAID -- IS AT ITS LOWEST EBB
IN 20 YEARS, THE UNITED STATES TODAY IS THE ONLY NATION THAT
ENJOYS THE TRUST OF BOTH SIDES,
(MORE)
U.S. AND THE MIDDLE EAST, CONT'D
3. CLEARLY, THE FORWARD MOMENTUM MUST CONTINUE, WE ARE
FLEXIBLE ABOUT THE MEANS TO ACHIEVE THE ULTIMATE GOAL, BUT WE
ARE UNBENDING IN OUR DESIRE TO MOVE FORWARD.
4. WE WILL PROCEED, OF COURSE, IN CONSULTATION WITH ISRAEL.
WE ARE A STEADFAST FRIEND, FORTY PERCENT OF ALL U.S. POSTWAR AID
TO ISRAEL HAS COME IN THE TWO YEARS OF THIS ADMINISTRATION.
5. ISRAEL'S CURRENT PROPOSAL -- SUBSTANTIAL TERRITORIAL
CONCESSIONS IN RETURN FOR AN END TO THE STATE OF WAR -- IS ONE
THAT SHOULD CERTAINLY BE DISCUSSED.
KOREA
-- KOREA IS A FLASH POINT FOR POSSIBLE CONFLICT IN ASIA.
-- NORTH KOREA IS HEAVILY ARMED (500,000), DANGEROUS AND
AGGRESSIVE AS WE HAVE JUST RECENTLY SEEN IN CRISIS,
-- THEREFORE, IT IS ESSENTIAL THAT AMERICA BE FIRM AND LEAVE
NO DOUBT OF ITS OBLIGATIONS.
-- THIS IS ONLY WAY TO DETER A NEW WAR IN ASIA. WE PROVED
THIS IN AUGUST, WHEN WE STOOD FIRM.
-- OUR TROOPS (42,000) ARE ESSENTIAL TO THE SUCCESS OF THIS
POLICY.
-- PROPOSAL BY CARTER TO REDUCE OR PULL OUT ARE DANGEROUS,
BECAUSE THEY TEMPT ATTACKS -- CREATE CRISIS OF CONFIDENCE, NOT
ONLY IN KOREA BUT IN JAPAN AND ELSEWHERE.
(OVER)
-- MANY OF US RECALL WHEN WE TOLD THE WORLD IN 1950 THAT
KOREA WAS OUTSIDE THE PERIMETER OF U.S. DEFENSES, SHORTLY
THEREAFTER, THE NORTH KOREANS ATTACKED, AND WE WERE AT WAR.
WE DON'T WANT A REPETITION OF 1950,
-- WE HAVE PROPOSED A NEW CONFERENCE WITH BOTH KOREAS, THE
UNITED STATES AND CHINA. THIS IS THE WAY TO EASE TENSIONS. No
UNILATERAL WITHDRAWALS.
B-1
1. FOR SEVERAL YEARS, ONE OF CLEAREST AMERICAN ADVANTAGES OVER
THE SOVIETS HAS BEEN THE SUPERIORITY OF OUR MANNED BOMBING FORCE.
VITAL THAT WE MAINTAIN THAT SUPERIORITY BECAUSE BOMBERS CARRY ALMOST
HALF OF OUR NUCLEAR MEGATTONAGE; BOMBERS CAN ALSO BE SENT ON MIS-
SIONS AND THEN BE RECALLED.
2. BUT THE KEY TO OUR BOMBING FORCE, THE B-52, HAS BECOME OLD
AND BECAUSE OF ADVANCING SOVIET TECHNOLOGY, CAN NO LONGER SAFELY
PENETRATE SOVIET AIR DEFENSES. WE NEED A REPLACEMENT.
3. Two FORMER PRESIDENT, SIX SECRETARIES OF DEFENSE AND THE PAST
FIVE CONGRESSES HAVE ALL CONCLUDED THAT THE B-1 IS THE BEST REPLACE-
MENT BECAUSE IT CAN PENETRATE SOVIET AIR DEFENSES,
(OVER)
4. MR. CARTER AND I TOTALLY DISAGREE ABOUT THE B-1. I AM FOR
IT AND WANT TO GO AHEAD WITH PRODUCTION. MR. CARTER CAN'T MAKE
UP HIS MIND. THE B-1 IS A GOOD AIRCRAFT, AND AFTER IT SUCCESSFULLY
COMPLETES ITS CURRENT TESTING, THE U.S. SHOULD BUILD A B-1 FLEET.
5. LET'S ALSO REALIZE THAT IN ADDITION TO AMERICANS WATCHING US
TONIGHT, FOREIGN LEADERS ARE ALSO CAREFULLY OBSERVING US, I'M
TROUBLED BY WHAT THE KREMLIN MUST THINK WHEN IT HEARS A SERIOUS
CANDIDATE FOR THE PRESIDENCY TALKING ABOUT FORFEITING ONE OF ITS
MOST IMPORTANT ADVANTAGES WE HAVE AGAINST THEM.
6. As A GENERAL RULE, I DON'T THINK THAT A U.S. PILOT SHOULD BE
SENT UP IN AN AIRCRAFT THAT IS OLDER THAN HE IS,
$5 - 7 BILLION CUT IN THE DEFENSE BUDGET
1. MOST OF MR. CARTER'S REMARKS ON DEFENSE FOCUS ON BUDGET CUTS.
HE SAYS, "WE CAN CUT BILLIONS OF DOLLARS FROM OUR DEFENSE
BUDGET AND AT THE SAME TIME INCREASE OUR ABILITY TO DEFEND
OURSELVES."
MR. CARTER HAS USED AT LEAST THREE DIFFERENT FIGURES FOR
THE AMOUNT THE DEFENSE BUDGETS CAN BE CUT:
-- $12-15 BILLION IN MARCH 1976;
-- $7-8 BILLION IN JANUARY 1976;
-- $5-7 BILLION MOST RECENTLY.
(OVER)
2. WE HAVE NO "FAT" LEFT TO CUT, LAST JANUARY, I DIRECTED A
SERIES OF MEASURES TO IMPROVE EFFICIENCY WHICH WILL SAVE $2.3
BILLION THIS YEAR AND UP TO $40 BILLION OVER THE NEXT FIFTEEN
YEARS.
IMPLEMENTED EFFICIENCIES IN FEDERAL PAY SYSTEMS TO
ASSURE THAT FEDERAL PAY DOES NOT EXCEED PAY IN THE
PRIVATE SECTOR.
ISSUED TIGHT RESTRICTIONS ON DEFENSE TRAVEL COSTS,
REDUCED THE NUMBER OF SENIOR OFFICIALS BY 4-5%.
REDUCED THE SIZE OF MANAGEMENT HEADQUARTERS.
EXPANDED THE NUMBER OF ACTIVITIES PERFORMED ON CONTRACTS
BY THE PRIVATE SECTOR RATHER THAN BY FEDERAL EMPLOYEES.
(MORE)
3. SOME RESTRAINT MEASURES REQUIRED APPROVAL BY THE CONGRESS,
THESE INCLUDED:
BASIC CHANGES IN COMPENSATION AND RETIREMENT OF MILITARY
PERSONNEL.
REVISIONS TO THE FEDERAL BLUE COLLAR PAY SYSTEM,
THE SALE OF ITEMS FROM THE NATIONAL STOCKPILE WHICH ARE
EXCESS TO OUR NEEDS.
THESE AND OTHER RESTRAINTS WOULD SAVE THE TAXPAYERS $1 BILLION
THIS YEAR ALONE, AND MORE THAN $80 BILLION OVER THE NEXT FIFTEEN-
YEAR PERIOD, BUT CONGRESS VOTED TO ALLOW US TO INSTITUTE LESS
THAN HALF THE SAVINGS WE PROPOSED.
(OVER)
4. BUT MR. CARTER WANTS A $7 BILLION CUT IN THE PRESENT BUDGET,
THIS MEANS HE WILL CUT INTO THE MUSCLE. MR. CARTER HAS YET TO
SPECIFY WHERE HE WOULD MAKE HIS $5-7 BILLION CUTS. HE SHOULD
BE CRITICIZING THE DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS FOR NOT PASSING THE
MEASURES WHICH I HAVE ALREADY PROPOSED.
IT'S ONE THING TO PROMISE TO REORGANIZE GOVERNMENT BUT REFUSE
TO SAY HOW, AND IT MAY JUST BE CAMPAIGN RHETORIC TO PROMISE
TAX REFORM AND NOT SAY HOW. BUT IT CAN BE TRULY IRRESPONSIBLE
FOR AN INEXPERIENCED CANDIDATE TO PROMISE TO CUT $5-7 BILLION
FROM THE DEFENSE BUDGET AND NOT SAY HOW.
MILITARY SALES REBUTTAL
MR. CARTER HAS CLAIMED THAT WE ARE THE WORLD'S LEADING SUPPLIER
OF WEAPONS OF WAR AND DEPEND ON MILITARY EXPORT FOR STABILIZING
OUR ECONOMY AND BALANCING TRADE RELATIONSHIPS.
1. THE U.S. GOVERNMENT HAS HAD AN ACTIVE PROGRAM OF MILITARY
ASSISTANCE TO FRIENDS AND ALLIES SINCE WORLD WAR II.
(A) OUR FOREIGN MILITARY SALES PROGRAM IS IN OUR OWN
NATIONAL INTEREST.
2. THE CONGRESS HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO REJECT ANY SALE OVER
$25 MILLION. THIS HAS NEVER HAPPENED.
3. A MAJORITY OF OUR MILITARY ASSISTANCE AND SALES PROGRAMS
GOES TO COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT, AIRFIELDS, PORT FACILITIES,
SUPPORT AND TRAINING,
(OVER)
4. COMMUNIST NATIONS CURRENTLY SPEND MORE THAN TWICE AS
MUCH FOR MILITARY AID THAN FOR ECONOMIC AID TO DEVELOPING
NATIONS,
(A) OUR PRIORITIES ARE REVERSED. EVEN THOUGH OUR GRANT
MILITARY AID IS NOW ENDING, IN RECENT YEARS WE SPENT TWICE
AS MUCH FOR ECONOMIC AID AS MILITARY AID.
(B) MANY CRITICS OF THE FMS PROGRAMS ARE THE VERY ONES WHO
URGED OUR FRIENDS AND ALLIES TO DO MORE FOR THEMSELVES TO
PROVIDE FOR THEIR OWN DEFENSE WITHOUT THE NEED OF AMERICAN
TROOPS, TODAY, THESE PEOPLE CRITICIZE A PROGRAM WHICH DOES
JUST THAT.
(MORE)
MILITARY SALES REBUTTAL, CONT'D
5. ISRAEL, FOR EXAMPLE, DOES NOT HAVE THE CAPABILITY TO PRODUCE
SUFFICIENT EQUIPMENT TO DEFEND ITSELF.
(A) AN OVERWHELMING PART OF OUR PROGRAM -- 71% OF OUR CREDITS
IN THE LAST FOUR YEARS -- HAS GONE TO ISRAEL. I WOULD NOT
WANT ISRAEL TO BE LEFT ALONE WITHOUT A SOURCE OF SUPPLY
TO ENABLE IT TO DEFEND ITSELF -- IN THE FACE OF A THREAT.
(B) IT IS NO SIN TO SELL EQUIPMENT TO OUR FRIENDS IF THEY
ARE ABLE TO PAY CASH, TO EXTEND CREDIT IF THEY WISH TO PAY
US BACK LATER OR -- AS IN THE CASE OF ISRAEL -- TO PROVIDE
THEM WITH EQUIPMENT THEY CANNOT AFFORD IN ORDER TO PROTECT
THEMSELVES. IF WE DON'T STAND UP FOR OUR INTERESTS OR OUR
FRIENDS, CERTAINLY NO ONE ELSE WILL.
ARMS SALE REBUTTAL
SINCE THE END OF WORLD WAR II, WE HAVE HAD A CONSISTENT
POLICY OF PROVIDING MILITARY ASSISTANCE TO OUR ALLIES AND
CLOSE FRIENDS.
-- IT IS OBVIOUSLY IN OUR NATIONAL INTEREST TO HAVE STRONG
ALLIES;
-- IT IS OBVIOUSLY IN OUR INTEREST NOT TO ALLOW FRIENDS TO
BE THREATENED BECAUSE THEY LACK A SELF DEFENSE CAPACITY.
IN RECENT YEARS, WE HAVE SHIFTED TO CASH SALES RATHER THAN
GRANTS.
(OVER)
-- THE BULK OF OUR MILITARY ASSISTANCE IS NOT FOR WEAPONS
BUT MORE FOR SUPPORT EQUIPMENT, TRAINING AND so FORTH.
WHERE DOES IT GO?
-- IN THE LAST TWO YEARS, ISRAEL HAS RECEIVED OVER $ 4 BILLION
IN ASSISTANCE,
-- IRAN HAS ORDERED NEW FIGHTERS AND OTHER EQUIPMENT.
OUR MILITARY ASSISTANCE TO IRAN WAS BEGUN BY TRUMAN; JOHNSON
SOLD THE FIRST MODERN FIGHTER TO IRAN IN 1966.
Now IRAN WANTS TO REPLACE ITS AIR DEFENSE, BUT THE COST OF
A NEW FIGHTER IS 7 TIMES THE OLDER ONE; THAT'S WHY THE TOTALS
SEEM HIGH.
EVERY ARMS SALE OVER $25 MILLION IS SUBMITTED TO THE CONGRESS.
NOT ONE HAS BEEN REJECTED.
RESPONSE TO CARTER CLAIM THAT THERE ARE MORE FLAG OFFICERS
NOW THAN DURING THE WAR:
EVERY LIEUTENANT (J.G.) IN HISTORY HAS ADVOCATED
GETTING RID OF ALL THE ADMIRALS, BUT LET'S LOOK
AT THE FACTS:
FIRST, WE HAVE HALF AS MANY GENERALS AND ADMIRALS
TODAY (1138) AS WE HAD AT THE END OF WORLD WAR II (2068).
SECOND, EVEN IF WE FIRED EVERY GENERAL AND ADMIRAL
CURRENTLY ON DUTY (AN ABSURD IDEA), WE WOULD ONLY
SAVE 60 MILLION DOLLARS PER YEAR.
(OVER)
THIRD, THE OFFICER-ENLISTED RATIO MUST REMAIN
HIGHER IN PEACETIME THAN WAR IN ORDER TO
ALLOW FOR RAPID MOBILIZATION IN AN EMERGENCY.
GOP PLATFORM
Morality in Foreign Policy
The goal of Republican foreign policy is the achievement of
liberty under law and a just and lasting peace in the world.
The principles by which we act to achieve peace and to
protect the interests of the United States must merit the
restored confidence of our people.
We recognize and commend that great beacon of human
courage and morality, Alexander Solzhenitsyn, for his
compelling message that we must fact the world with no
illusions about the nature of tyranny. Ours will be a
foreign policy that keeps this ever in mind.
Ours will be a foreign policy which recognizes that in
international negotiations we must make no undue concessions:
that in pursuing detente we must not grant unilateral favors
with only the hope of getting future favors with only the hope
of getting future favors in return.
Agreements that are negotiated, such as the one signed in
Helsinki, must not take from those who do not have freedom
the hope of one day gaining it.
Finally, we are firmly committed to a foreign policy in which
secret agreements, hidden from our people, will have no part.
Honestly, openly, and with firm conviction, we shall go forward
as a united people to forge a lasting peace in the world based
upon our deep belief in the rights of man, the rule of law and
guidance by the hand of God.
CHINA NUCLEAR EXPLOSION -- CARTER'S PLAN
IF CARTER CLAIMS THAT HIS NON-PROLIFERATION PLAN
WOULD HAVE PREVENTED THE CHINESE NUCLEAR EXPLOSION
AND RESULTING RADIATION OVER THE U.S., YOU MAY WISH
TO RESPOND AS FOLLOWS:
FIRST, THE CHINESE HAVE ALWAYS RESISTED ANY RESTRICTIONS
ON NUCLEAR TESTING; AND
SECOND, THE CARTER PLAN CALLS FOR A MORATORIUM
ONLY WITH THE SOVIETS.
CIA STUDY ON SOVIET DEFENSE SPENDING
Q:
Senator Proxmire's Subcommittee on Economy in Government has
released testimony by CIA Director Bush that Soviet spending for
defense is much larger than previously estimated. What is the
meaning of this information and how will it affect American policy?
A:
This revised estimate of Soviet spending (published in May)
underlines the point I have been making for the past two years;
that the U.S. must stop the decline in defense spending and must
increase our real expenditure for national defense.
The Soviets devote a larger proportion of their total spending
to defense than we do. (Soviets 11-13%; US approx. 5%)
That need not be alarming. The study also shows that the
Soviet defense industries are far less efficient than ours; that
is, comparable output imposes a far greater burden on the Soviet
economy.
Thus the study's significance is not that the Soviets are
turning out more equipment but that they are willing to spend
whatever it takes to maintain strong defenses.
The Soviets are clearly making a major effort as this CIA study
shows. Under no circumstances can we afford to allow a change in
the balance of forces. That is- why talk of major cuts in defense
spending is extremely dangerous.
LDCs - U.S. AID
-- Since WWII we have led the world in promoting respect for
human rights among all nations and all people. In the last
five years we have given over $40 billion in foreign aid --
nearly one-third of all aid given by all the industrial countries
to the developing world.
-- We do this for two reasons:
First, humanitarian concern. For example, three-fourths of
our aid goes to the poorest nations.
Second, we are serving our own interests. Our economy will
benefit from our aid to the developing countries. They provide
increasing valuable markets for our industries. Our exports
to the developing countries rose from about one billion dollars
in 1965 to nearly $40 billion last year. This means more jobs
and prosperity here at home.
-- We are not ashamed of our prosperity and our industrial might.
The reason we consume 30 percent of the world's resources with
5 percent of the world's population is because our economy
produces more than 30 percent of the world's goods. Our
wealth is due to our productivity. I'm proud of our industrial
achievements.
- -2-
-- The policy of my Administration is to help the developing
countries help themselves. Of course, we've provided food
to help with emergency needs -- six million to us this year
alone -- but in the long-run we are helping these countries
increase their own productive capacities.