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
4526213
label
Zionist Organization of America, Los Angeles, CA, August 28, 1969
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
4526213
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Zionist Organization of America, Los Angeles, CA, August 28, 1969
citationUrl
collections
Gerald R. Ford Congressional Papers
Speeches
subjects
Israel
Soviet Union
Middle East conflicts
United States-Soviet relations
iiifBase
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
4526213
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1969-08-31
month
8
year
1969
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1969-08-01
month
8
year
1969
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
url
mediaId
0c411b9e4f943a93
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box D27, folder "Zionist Organization of America,
Los Angeles, CA, August 28, 1969" of the Ford Congressional Papers: Press Secretary and
Speech File 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. The Council 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States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.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.
Digitized from Box D27 of The Ford Congressional Papers: Press Secretary and Speech File at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
ZIONIST ORGANIZATION OF AMERICA, THURSDAY
EVENING, AUGUST 28, 1969, AT THE
CENTURY PLAZA HOTEL, LOS ANGELES, CALIF.
Minnty who speaks
mital who SHALOM!
(SHAH-LOAM).
wises I
FIND IT MOST NATURAL TO USE THE
an
I
TRADITIONAL HEBREW GREETING, SINCE I HAVE
SPOKEN BEFORE MANY JEWISH ORGANIZATIONS IN
4
RECENT MONTHS. ALSO, I AM A GREAT BELIEVER
IN PEACE, AS I AM CERTAIN EACH OF YOU ARE.
I HAVE COME TO YOU TONIGHT TO SPEAK
I
OF PEACE -- OF WAR AND PEACE -- OF THE
w
MIDDLE EAST AND THE HEART-RENDING PROBLEMS
THAT DISTURB US ALL AS WE LOOK AT THAT
DEEPLY TROUBLED REGION.
I HAVE COME TO YOU TO SPEAK OF THE
NIXON ADMINISTRATION'S VIEW OF THE MIDDLE
LIBRAS
EAST AND TO MAKE SOME PERSONAL OBSERVATIONS
-2-
OF MY OWN.
THE UNITED STATES HAS, OF COURSE, A
TREMENDOUS CONTINUING RESPONSIBILITY TO
PROMOTE PEACE AND STABILITY IN THE MIDDLE
EAST / WHETHER OR NOT THAT TASK SEEMS
IMPROBABLE AND IMPOSSIBLE.
I AM AWARE THAT MANY INDIVIDUALS
BELIEVE THE UNITED STATES SHOULD SIMPLY
KEEP HANDS OFF THE MIDDLE EAST, MANY WHO
BELIEVE THAT OUR COUNTRY IS STANDING IN THE
WAY OF AN ISRAELI-ARAB SETTLEMENT BY TRYING
TO HELP FIND A SOLUTION. I DO NOT SHARE
THAT VIEW.
CERTAINLY THE FACT THAT THE UNITED
STATES HAS ENGAGED IN BOTH FOUR-POWER AND
TWO-POWER TALKS ON THE MIDDLE EAST
R.FORD
SITUATION HAS NOT CONTRIBUTED IN ANY MEASURE
TO THE STATE OF WAR WHICH CURRENTLY EXISTS
-3-
BETWEEN ISRAEL AND THE ARAB STATES. AT
THE SAME TIME, HOWEVER, THE DANGER OF
NUCLEAR CONFRONTATION HAS BEEN GREATLY
by such talks
REDUCED
THAT IS PROGRESS FOR ALL MANKIND.
I ASSURE YOU / THE NIXON ADMINISTRATION
IS CONVINCED THAT ONLY LOCAL INITIATIVES
CAN RESOLVE LOCAL CONFLICTS IN THE MIDDLE
EAST. IT IS ONLY LOCAL SOLUTIONS THAT CAN
PRODUCE A PERMANENT PEACE BUT THE
ADMINISTRATION BELIEVES ITs CAN BE HELPFUL.
argent, careful, broad + speape
AND THAT IS ALL THE ADMINISTRATION IS TRYING
TO Do! DO
for the past 8 months
NOW, EXACTLY WHAT HAS THE
ADMINISTRATION BEEN TRYING TO DO AND WHY?
FOR THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION WE
MUST GO BACK TO THE MIDDLE EASTERN
SITUATION AS IT EXISTED LAST JANUARY.
EFFORTS TO ACHIEVE PEACE HAD SLOWED
-4-
ALMOST TO A STANDSTILL. DESPITE THE BEST
EFFORTS OF THE UNITED NATIONS REPRESENTATIVE,
& progress at best
AMBASSADOR JARRING, DISCUSSIONS WERE ON
DEAD CENTER.
IT HAD BECOME APPARENT THAT A NEW
INITIATIVE WAS MANDATORY. WITHOUT SOME
PROGRESS TOWARD PEACE, THE SITUATION COULD
4 between The major provers,
ONLY BECOME MORE DANGEROUS. A NEW
1
INITIATIVE WAS REQUIRED BECAUSE NO
RESPONSIBLE AMERICAN PRESIDENT COULD FAIL
TO RECOGNIZE THAT THE INTERESTS OF THE
UNITED STATES -- AS WELL AS THE INTERESTS
OF THE MIDDLE EASTERN PEOPLES -- WERE
DEEPLY INVOLVED.
IN FEBRUARY THE PRESIDENT LAUNCHED
A SERIES OF CONSULTATIONS WITH THE FOUR
PERMANENT MEMBERS OF THE UN SECURITY COUNCIL,
AT FIRST BILATERALLY AND THEN IN MORE FORMAL
-5-
MEETINGS, TO DETERMINE WHAT MIGHT BE DONE
TO HELP BREAK THE STALEMATE,
SUBSEQUENTLY, A SERIES OF MEETINGS
WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF THE SOVIET UNION
DEVELOPED.
IT HAS BEEN SAID THAT THOSE TALKS
HAVE BROKEN DOWN. I CAN TELL YOU TONIGHT
THAT THOSE TALKS ARE CONTINUING.
THE ADMINISTRATION DOES NOT BELIEVE
THAT THE U.S.-SOVIET TALKS ON THE MIDEAST
CAN BRING PEACE IN AND OF THEMSELVES. BUT IT
DOES BELIEVE THE UNITED STATES WOULD BE
DERELICT IF IT DID NOT MAKE EVERY EFFORT
TO DETERMINE WHETHER NEGOTIATIONS BETWEEN
ISRAEL AND THE ARAB STATES WOULD BE POSSIBLE
UNDER AUSPICES OF AMBASSADOR JARRING, or any
other indurdreals
THERE ARE SOUND REASONS FOR THE
BILATERAL TALKS WITH THE SOVIET UNION.
-6-
realistically
THE NIXON ADMINISTRATION SEES SOVIET
INFLUENCE IN THE MIDDLE EAST AS A
REGRETTABLE FACT OF LIFE -- A DEMONSTRATION
OF SOVIET POWER WHICH MUST BE DEALT WITH
THERE JUST AS ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE WORLD.
THE ADMINISTRATION HAS NO ILLUSIONS
ABOUT LONGRANGE SOVIET INTENTIONS, BUT
IN THE MIDDLE EAST AS IN ALL OTHER AREAS OF
THE WORLD THE NIXON ADMINISTRATION IS TRYING
TO TURN AN ERA OF CONFRONTATION INTO AN ERA
OF NEGOTIATION.
WE KNOW THAT THE RUSSIANS NOW ARE
EMPLOYING GUNBOAT DIPLOMACY IN THE
MEDITERRANEAN. THEY NOW HAVE 63 TO 65
in that body Inator
VESSELS THERE, A GREATER NUMBER OF SHIPS
THAN OUR SIXTH FLEET. THE SOVIET VESSELS
ARE ENGAGED IN NAVAL EXERCISES OFF THE
GERALD R.FORD
COAST OF SYRIA AND EGYPT, USING BASES IN
-7-
THOSE TWO COUNTRIES. THE EXERCISES ARE
CENTERED AROUND A SO-CALLED RUSSIAN
AIRCRAFT CARRIER, A SHIP WHICH IS EQUIPPED
FOR THE TAKEOFF AND LANDING OF TROOP-CARRYING
HELICOPTERS.
THE RUSSIANS ALSO HAVE SENT 10 SHIPS
INTO THE RED SEA-INDIAN OCEAN AREA SOUTH OF
THE SUEZ CANAL.
THE SOVIET DESIGNS IN THE MIDDLE EAST
ARE READILY APPARENT TO THE UNITED STATES.
WE ARE FULLY AWARE OF THEIR LONGRANGE
INTENTIONS, AND WE ARE CAREFULLY WATCHING
CURRENT DEVELOPMENTS.
THE RUSSIANS ARE NOT ACHIEVING WHAT
THEY WANT IN THE MIDDLE EAST -- AND THAT
IS HEL PFUL TO US. THE SOVIETS ACQUIRED
HVE
NAVAL AND AIR BASE RIGHTS IN EGYPT ON AN
INFORMAL BASIS, BUT THE RUS$IANS ARE ALMOST
-8-
CERTAIN TO FIND THIS A BAD BARGAIN IN THE
END. I DO NOT BELIEVE THE EGYPTIANS WILL
EVER ACCORD THE RUSSIANS FORMAL RIGHTS TO
these THE BASES As installations,
absorady
THE SOVIETS ARE TRYING TO USE ARAB-
ISRAELI TENSIONS TO EXPAND INTO THE MIDDLE
EAST. THEY FAILED IN FRONTAL ASSAULTS ON
TURKEY AND IRAN AND SO THEY ARE TRYING TO
LEAPFROG THEM TO RUSSIA'S LONG-SOUGHT
OBJECTIVE OF BECOMING A MIDDLE EAST POWER.
IT IS IN THE VITAL INTERESTS OF THE UNITED
STATES TO PREVENT SOVIET DOMINATION OF THE
MIDDLE EAST. WORLD PEACE WOULD BE
ENDANGERED IF THE SOVIET UNION GAINS A
DOMINATING POSITION IN THIS AREA OF THE
WORLD THAT HAS SUCH HISTORICAL AND STRATEGIC
IMPORTANCE.
FORD MORARY
THE MIDDLE EAST HAS ALWAYS BEEN A
-9-
POTENTIAL TARGET FOR SOVIET EXPANSION
EXTENSION OF ITS EUROPEAN SPHERE OF
INFLUENCE.
LET ME TOUCH ON THE SIX-DAY WAR OF
JUNE 1967 FOR A MOMENT AND SAY THAT BOTH THE
SOVIET UNION AND THE UNITED STATES LOST IN
in a major way
to leaser your
THAT WAR. THE UNITED STATES LOST SOME OF
ITS OPTIONS FOR THE PROMOTION OF STABILITY
IN THE MIDDLE EAST THE SOVIET UNION LOST
PRESTIGE, MANEUVERING ROOM AND A VAST
AMOUNT OF ARMS DONATED TO THE ARABS.
The
WHY SHOULD THE UNITED STATES ENGAGE
. &
IN TALKS WITH THE SOVIET UNION ON THE
MIDDLE EAST?
WE MUST DO WHAT WE CAN TO PROBE AND
We must be Amert, school + firm
ASSESS RUSSIAN INTENTIONS, AND WE MUST KEEP
UP A DIALOGUE IN ORDER TO AVOID A NUCLEAR
CONFRONTATION IN THAT AREA OF THE WORLD.
-10-
AS FOR ISRAEL AND THE ARAB STATES, IT
MAY BE THAT THE U.S.-SOVIET TALKS WILL
PRODUCE THE BROAD FRAMEWORK FOR REALISTIC
NEGOTIATIONS BETWEEN THE PRINCIPAL PARTIES
TO THE DISPUTE. FOR ANY NEGOTIATION TO
BEGIN, THE PARTIES MUST COME TO BELIEVE
THAT REALISTIC NEGOTIATION IS POSSIBLE AND
ACT ACCORDINGLY -- IN GOOD FAITH.
IT IS NOT HARD TO AGREE THAT PEACE
IS ESSENTIAL. WHAT IS DIFFICULT TO AGREE
ON ON/IS HOW TO ACHIEVE PEACE.
IT IS NOT ALWAYS ACCURATE TO APPLY
STATEMENTS MADE ABOUT ONE PART OF THE
WORLD TO ANOTHER. BUT I THINK IT IS WORTH
CONSIDERING HERE TONIGHT SOME OF THE
STATEMENTS MADE BY PRESIDENT NIXON DURING
HIS RECENT TRIP TO ASIA.
GERALD R.
LIBRARY
HE SPOKE OF LOCAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR
-11-
PEACE AND PROGRESS / AND SECURITY. HE SAID
MAKING AND PRESERVING PEACE IS WORK THAT
MUST CONCERN THE WHOLE WORLD. BUT, HE
EMPHASIZED, PEACE CAN BE ACHIEVED ONLY
THROUGH THE RESOLUTION OF CONFLICTING
FORCES AT WORK IN EACH PART OF THE WORLD.
THE MAIN OBJECTIVE OF THE NIXON
ADMINISTRATION IN THE MIDDLE EAST IS
PEACE PEACE BECAUSE IT IS ESSENTIAL IF
THE MEN, WOMEN AND CHILDREN OF THE AREA ARE
TO LIVE IN SAFETY AND TO LEAD CREATIVE
LIVES PEACE BECAUSE THE GOVERNMENTS OF THE
AREA MUST FIND A WAY TO DIVERT THEIR
RESOURCES FROM WARFARE TO ECONOMIC PROGRESS
f.
PEACE BECAUSE THE UNITED STATES CAN BEST
constructive
PURSUE ITS VARIED INTERESTS IN THE MIDDLE
EAST WHEN THERE IS PEACE THERE PEACE
BECAUSE THE UNITED STATES DOES NOT WISH TO
-12-
BECOME INVOLVED IN A MAJOR CONFLICT IN
THE MIDDLE EAST OR ANY OTHER AREA.
THE NIXON ADMINISTRATION DOES NOT
BELIEVE THE UNITED STATES OR ANY OTHER
MAJOR POWER CAN IMPOSE PE ACE IN THE MIDDLE
EAST.
meaningful
A REAL PEACE CAN ONLY GROW OUT OF
AGREEMENT AMONG THOSE WHO ARE IN CONFLICT.
THE NIXON ADMINISTRATION WILL
DILIGENTLY AND WITH ALL ITS RESOURCES HELP
WHERE IT CAN. WE WILL HELP IN PROVIDING
SECURITY WHERE IT IS NEEDED, AND WE WILL
HELP IN WORKING TOWARD AGREEMENT. BUT WE
CAN ONLY HELP.
THE NIXON ADMINISTRATION HAS
CAREFULLY WEIGHED WHAT IS REQUIRED TO MAKE
PEACE IN THE MIDDLE EAST AND WHAT IS
REQUIRED TO KEEP THE PEACE.
FORD Y LIBRARY GERALD
-13-
THE NIXON ADMINISTRATION IS KEENLY
AWARE THAT AN IMPOSED PEACE, EVEN IF IT WERE
POSSIBLE, WOULD NOT LIKELY BE A PERMANENT
PEACE.
THE NIXON ADMINISTRATION DOES NOT
SEEK TO IMPOSE PEACE IN THE MIDDLE EAST,
BUT IT WILL SPARE NO EFFORT TO HELP FIND
THE ROAD TO PEACE.
I MENTIONED EARLIER HELP FROM THE
ADMINISTRATION IS PROVIDING SECURITY. IN
THAT CONNECTION, I WOULD NOTE THAT THE
FIRST OF THE 50 PHANTOM JETS NOW ON ORDER
FOR ISRAEL WILL BE DELIVERED NEXT MONTH,
a fine mething amount
AND THE ORIGINAL ORDER OF 44 SKYHAWKS HAS
BEEN DOUBLED TO 88.
RIGHT HERE IN CALIFORNIA, ISRAELI
PILOTS AND MECHANICS HAVE BEEN TRAINED TO
LIBRARY
FLY AND MAINTAIN U.S. PHANTOM JETS. THE
-14-
FIRST CLASS OF ISRAELI PHANTOM JET PILOTS
WAS RECENTLY GRADUATED FROM THE U.S. TRAINING
PROGRAM.
WHAT BETTER PROOF CAN THERE BE THAT
THE NIXON ADMINISTRATION IS FULFILLING U.S.
COMMITMENTS TO ISRAEL? &
IT HAS BEEN SAID THAT THE U.S. SHOULD
EMPLOY A MORE BALANCED POLICY IN THE MIDDLE
EAST. IF THERE IS VALIDITY TO THAT
STATEMENT, THEN/WHAT questionable SHOULD BE SAID OF THE
UNITED NATIONS AND ITS PRACTICE OF
CONDEMNING ISRAEL FOR ITS RETALIATORY
RAIDS BUT ONLY MILDLY REPROVING ARAB
VIOLATORS OF THE UN CEASE-FIRE? AND WHAT
T00 SHOULD BE SAID OF THE ARABS WHO
CURRENTLY ARE FIRING RUSSIAN-MADE ROCKETS
INTO JERUSALEM?
BERALD
ALTHOUGH THE ANALOGY IS NOT PERFECT,
-15-
I CAN READILY UNDERSTAND ISRAEL'S
DETERMINATION NEVER TO BECOME ANOTHER
CZECHOSLOVAKIA.
wheng2. look I
DESPERATELY HOPE THE WAR FEVER
at The
CAN BE COOLED. WE MUST AT LEAST APPLY
A POULTICE.
many THE ACADEMIC TYPES DESPAIR AND
DECLARE THAT THERE IS NO SOLUTION TO THE
MIDDLE EAST SITUATION.
WE WHO ARE IN GOVERNMENT CANNOT AFFORD
TO TAKE SUCH A DEFEATIST ATTITUDE. AND I
WOULD NOT IF WE COULD. I BELIEVE WE SHOULD
PURSUE THE IMMEDIATE OBJECTIVE OF A MIDDLE
EAST ARMS BALANCE WHILE TRYING TO CREATE
THE FRAMEWORK FOR DIRECT NEGOTIATIONS
BETWEEN THE PARTIES TO THE CONFLICT.
WE SHOULD NOT DESPAIR IN OUR PURSUIT
OF PEACE IN THE MIDDLE EAST. The problems fthe
hour should spur us to greater efforts.
-15-
I SAY THIS BECAUSE THE SOVIETS MUST
ULTIMATELY CONCLUDE THAT THEY HAVE MADE
A BAD INVESTMENT IN THE MIDDLE EAST. HOW
MANY TIMES WILL THE RUSSIANS BE WILLING TO
GO THROUGH A FIASCO LIKE THE SIX-DAY WAR?
FOR THE SHORT TERM, THE SITUATION
LOOKS GRIM. BUT I REMAIN THE ETERNAL
OPTIMIST and 2 between for good Masm
NATIONS AS WELL AS INDIVIDUALS -- IN
THE MIDDLE EAST AND ELSEWHERE -- SURELY
RECOGNIZE THAT PEACE IS ESSENTIAL IF THEY
ARE TO MAKE THE EARTH A BETTER PLACE TO
LIVE.
THE ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF A PEACE
SETTLEMENT IN THE MIDDLE EAST HAVE BEEN
SPELLED OUT IN THE UN SECURITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION OF NOVEMBER 22, 1967.
GENETO R.FORD WISSARE
THE PROBLEM LIES IN DIFFERING
-17-
INTERPRETATIONS OF THAT RESOLUTION: HOW
TO CREATE A STATE OF PEACE./HOW TO PRESERVE
IT/AND HOW, IN PRACTICAL WAYS, TO
GUARANTEE IT.
I AM NOT ONE OF THOSE WHO
EUPHORICALLY CRY OUT THAT IF AMERICA CAN
LAND A MAN ON THE MOON, SHE CAN DO ANYTHING.
I SIMPLY SAY THIS. WE HAVE REACHED
THE MOON, AND NOW WE MUST HELP TO MAKE
EACH CORNER OF THE PLANET EARTH A PLACE
WHERE HUMAN BEINGS CAN LIVE IN PEACE.
SHALOM.
END : :
Distribution: Full
air Galleries mail 10:00 10:30 Q.M. a.m. 8/28/69 8/28/69 M Office Copy
AN ADDRESS BY REP. GERALD R. FORD, K-MICH.
MINORITY LEADER, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
BEFORE THE ZIONIST ORGANIZATION OF AMERICA
AT THE CENTURY PLAZA HOTEL, LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA
THURSDAY EVENING, AUGUST 28, 1969
FOR RELEASE AT 6 P.M. (E.D.T.) THURSDAY
SHALOM!
I find it most natural to use the traditional Hebrew greeting, since I have
spoken before many Jewish organizations in recent months. Also, I am a great
believer in peace, as I am certain each of us are.
I have come to you tonight to speak of peace of war and peace of the
Middle East and the heart-rending problems that disturb us all as we look at that
deeply troubled region.
I have come to you to speak of the Nixon Administration's view of the Middle
East and to make some personal observations of my own.
The United States has, of course, a tremendous continuing responsibility to
promote peace and stability in the Middle East whether or not that task seems
improbable and impossible.
I am aware that many individuals believe the United States should simply keep
hands off the Middle East, many who believe that our country is standing in the way
of an Israeli-Arab settlement by trying to help find a solution. I do not share
that view.
Certainly the fact that the United States has engaged in both four-power
and two-power talks on the Middle East situation has not contributed in any measure
to the state of war which currently exists between Israel and the Arab states. At
the same time, however, the danger of muclear confrontation has been greatly
reduced. That is progress for all mankind.
I assure you the Nixon Administration is convinced that only local
initiatives can resolve local conflicts in the Middle East. It is only local
solutions that can produce a permanent peace. But the Administration believes it
can be helpful. And that is all the Administration is trying to do.
Now, exactly what has the Administration been trying to do and why?
For the answer to that question we must go back to the Middle Eastern
situation as it existed last January.
Efforts to achieve peace had slowed almost to a standstill. Despite the
best efforts of the United Nations representative, Ambassador Jarring, discussions
were on dead center.
(more)
-2-
It had become apparent that a new initiative was mandatory. Without some
progress toward peace, the situation could only become more dangerous. A new
initiative was required because no responsible American President could fail to
recognize that the interests of the United States -- as well as the interests of
the Middle Eastern peoples -- were deeply involved.
In February the President launched a series of consultations with the four
permanent members of the UN Security Council, at first bilaterally and then in more
formal meetings, to determine what might be done to help break the stalemate.
Subsequently, a series of meetings with representatives of the Soviet Union
developed.
It has been said that those talks have broken down. I can tell you tonight
that those talks are continuing.
The Administration does not believe that the U.S.-Soviet talks on the Mideast
can bring peace in and of themselves. But it does believe the Uhited States would
be derelict if it did not make every effort to determine whether negotiations
between Israel and the Arab states would be possible under auspices of Ambassador
Jarring.
There are sound reasons for the bilateral talks with the Soviet Union.
The Nixon Administration sees Soviet influence in the Middle East as a
regrettable fact of life -- a demonstration of Soviet power which must be dealt with
there just as anywhere else in the world.
The Administration has no illusions about longrange Soviet intentions, but
in the Middle East as in all other areas of the world the Nixon Administration is
trying to turn an era of confrontation into an era of negotiation.
We know that the Russians now are employing gunboat diplomacy in the
Mediterranean. They now have 63 to 65 vessels there, a greater number of ships
than our Sixth Fleet. The Soviet vessels are engaged in naval exercises off the
coast of Syria and Egypt, using bases in those two countries. The exercises are
centered around a so-called Russian aircraft carrier, a ship which is equipped for
the takeoff and landing of troop-carrying helicopters.
The Russians also have sent 10 ships into the Red Sea-Indian Ocean area
south of the Suez Canal.
The Soviet designs in the Middle East are readily apparent to the United
States. We are fully aware of their longrange intentions, and we are carefully
watching current developments.
The Russians are not achieving what they want in the Middle East -- and that
(more)
-3-
is helpful to us. The Soviets acquired naval and air base rights in Egypt on an
informal basis, but the Russians are almost certain to find this a bad bargain in
the end. I do not believe the Egyptians will ever accord the Russians formal
rights to the bases.
The Soviets are trying to use Arab-Israeli tensions to expand into the
Middle East. They failed in frontal assaults on Turkey and Iran and so they are
trying to leapfrog them to Russia's long-sought objective of becoming a Middle East
power. It is in the vital interests of the United States to prevent Soviet
domination of the Middle East. World peace would be endangered if the Soviet Union
gains a dominating position in this area of the world that has such historical and
strategic importance.
The Middle East has always been a potential target for Soviet expansion
extension of its European sphere of influence.
Let me touch on the Six-Day War of June 1967 for a moment and say that both
the Soviet Union and the United States lost in that war. The United States lost
some of its options for the promotion of stability in the Middle East; the Soviet
Union lost prestige, maneuvering room and a vast amount of arms donated to the
Arabs.
Why should the United States engage in talks with the Soviet Union on the
Middle East?
We must do what we can to probe and assess Russian intentions, and we must
keep up a dialogue in order to avoid a nuclear confrontation in that area of the
world.
As for Israel and the Arab states, it may be that the U.S. -Soviet talks will
produce the broad framework for realistic negotiations between the principal
parties to the dispute. For any negotiation to begin, the parties must come to
believe that realistic negotiation is possible and act accordingly -- in good faith.
It is not hard to agree that peace is essential. What is difficult to agree
on is how to achieve peace.
It is not always accurate to apply statements made about one part of the
world to another. But I think it is worth considering here tonight some of the
statements made by President Nixon during his recent trip to Asia.
He spoke of local responsibility for peace and progress and security. He
said making and preserving peace is work that must concern the whole world. But,
he emphasized, peace can be achieved only through the resolution of conflicting
forces at work in each part of the world.
(more)
-4-
The main objective of the Nixon Administration in the Middle East is peace
peace because it is essential if the men, women and children of the area are to
live in safety and to lead creative lives. peace because the governments of the
area must find a way to divert their resources from warfare to economic progress
peace because the United States can best pursue its varied interests in the Middle
East when there is peace there
peace because the United States does not wish to
become involved in a major conflict in the Middle East or any other area.
The Nixon Administration does not believe the United States or any other
major power can impose peace in the Middle East.
A real peace can only grow out of agreement among those who are in conflict.
The Nixon Administration will diligently and with all its resources help
where it can. We will help in providing security where it is needed, and we will
help in working toward agreement. But we can only help.
The Nixon Administration has carefully weighed what is required to make
peace in the Middle East and what is required to keep the peace.
The Nixon Administration is keenly aware that an imposed peace, even if it
were possible, would not likely be a permanent peace.
The Nixon Administration does not seek to impose peace in the Middle East,
but it will spare no effort to help find the road to peace.
I mentioned earlier help from the Administration is providing security. In
that connection, I would note that the first of the 50 Phantom jets now on order for
Israel will be delivered next month, and the original order of 44 Skyhawks has been
doubled to 88.
Right here in California, Israeli pilots and mechanics have been trained to
fly and maintain U.S. Phantom jets. The first class of Israeli Phantom jet pilots
was recently graduated from the U.S. training program.
What better proof can there be that the Nixon Administration is fulfilling
U.S. commitments to Israel?
It has been said that the U.S. should employ a more balanced policy in the
Middle East. If there is validity to that statement, then what should be said of
the United Nations and its practice of condemning Israel for its retaliatory raids
but only mildly reproving Arab violators of the UN cease-fire? And what too should
be said of the Arabs who currently are firing Russian-made rockets into Jerusalem?
Although the analogy is not perfect, I can readily understand Israel's
determination never to become another Czechoslovakia.
I desperately hope the war fever can be cooled. We must at least apply a
poultice.
(more)
-5-
The academic types despair and declare that there is no solution to the
Middle East situation.
We who are in government cannot afford to take such a defeatist attitude.
And I would not if we could. I believe we should pursue the immediate objective
of a Middle East arms balance while trying to create the framework for direct
negotiations between the parties to the conflict.
We should not despair in our pursuit of peace in the Middle East.
I say this because the Soviets must ultimately conclude that they have made
a bad investment in the Middle East. How many times will the Russians be willing
to go through a fiasco like the Six-Day War?
For the short term, the situation looks grim. But I remain the eternal
optimist.
Nations as well as individuals - in the Middle East and elsehwere - surely
recognize that peace is essential if they are to make the earth a better place to
live.
The essential elements of a peace settlement in the Middle East have been
spelled out in the UN Security Council Resolution of November 22, 1967.
The problem lies in differing interpretations of that resolution: How to
create a state of peace, how to preserve it and how, in practical ways, to guarantee
it.
I am not one of those who euphorically cry out that if America can land a
man on the moon, she can do anything.
I simply say this. We have reached the moon, and now we must help to make
each corner of the planet earth a place where human beings can live in peace.
SHALOM.
# # #
AN ADDRESS BY REP. GERALD R. FORD, R-MICH.
MINORITY LEADER, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
BEFORE THE ZIONIST ORGANIZATION OF AMERICA
AT THE CENTURY PLAZA HOTEL, LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA
THURSDAY EVENING, AUGUST 28, 1969
FOR RELEASE AT 6 P.M. (E.D.T.) THURSDAY
SHALOM!
I find it most natural to use the traditional Hebrew greeting, since I have
spoken before many Jewish organizations in recent months. Also, I am a great
believer in peace, as I am certain each of us are.
I have come to you tonight to speak of peace -- of war and peace -- of the
Middle East and the heart-rending problems that disturb us all as we look at that
deeply troubled region.
I have come to you to speak of the Nixon Administration's view of the Middle
East and to make some personal observations of my own.
The United States has, of course, a tremendous continuing responsibility to
promote peace and stability in the Middle East whether or not that task seems
improbable and impossible.
I am aware that many individuals believe the United States should simply keep
hands off the Middle East, many who believe that our country is standing in the way
of an Israeli-Arab settlement by trying to help find a solution. I do not share
that view.
Certainly the fact that the United States has engaged in both four-power
and two-power talks on the Middle East situation has not contributed in any measure
to the state of war which currently exists between Israel and the Arab states. At
the same time, however, the danger of muclear confrontation has been greatly
reduced. That is progress for all mankind.
I assure you the Nixon Administration is convinced that only local
initiatives can resolve local conflicts in the Middle East. It is only local
solutions that can produce a permanent peace. But the Administration believes it
can be helpful. And that is all the Administration is trying to do.
Now, exactly what has the Administration been trying to do and why?
For the answer to that question we must go back to the Middle Eastern
situation as it existed last January.
Efforts to achieve peace had slowed almost to a standstill. Despite the
best efforts of the United Nations representative, Ambassador Jarring, discussions
were on dead center.
(more)
-2-
It had become apparent that a new initiative was mandatory. Without some
progress toward peace, the situation could only become more dangerous. A new
initiative was required because no responsible American President could fail to
recognize that the interests of the United States -- as well as the interests of
the Middle Eastern peoples -- were deeply involved.
In February the President launched a series of consultations with the four
permanent members of the UN Security Council, at first bilaterally and then in more
formal meetings, to determine what might be done to help break the stalemate.
Subsequently, a series of meetings with representatives of the Soviet Union
developed.
It has been said that those talks have broken down. I can tell you tonight
that those talks are continuing.
The Administration does not believe that the U.S. -Soviet talks on the Mideast
can bring peace in and of themselves. But it does believe the United States would
be derelict if it did not make every effort to determine whether negotiations
between Israel and the Arab states would be possible under auspices of Ambassador
Jarring.
There are sound reasons for the bilateral talks with the Soviet Union.
The Nixon Administration sees Soviet influence in the Middle East as a
regrettable fact of life -- a demonstration of Soviet power which must be dealt with
there just as anywhere else in the world.
The Administration has no illusions about longrange Soviet intentions, but
in the Middle East as in all other areas of the world the Nixon Administration is
trying to turn an era of confrontation into an era of negotiation.
We know that the Russians now are employing gunboat diplomacy in the
Mediterranean. They now have 63 to 65 vessels there, a greater number of ships
than our Sixth Fleet. The Soviet vessels are engaged in naval exercises off the
coast of Syria and Egypt, using bases in those two countries. The exercises are
centered around a so-called Russian aircraft carrier, a ship which is equipped for
the takeoff and landing of troop-carrying helicopters.
The Russians also have sent 10 ships into the Red Sea-Indian Ocean area
south of the Suez Canal.
The Soviet designs in the Middle East are readily apparent to the United
States. We are fully aware of their longrange intentions, and we are carefully
watching current developments.
The Russians are not achieving what they want in the Middle East -- and that
(more)
-3-
is helpful to us. The Soviets acquired naval and air base rights in Egypt on an
informal basis, but the Russians are almost certain to find this a bad bargain in
the end. I do not believe the Egyptians will ever accord the Russians formal
rights to the bases.
The Soviets are trying to use Arab-Israeli tensions to expand into the
Middle East. They failed in frontal assaults on Turkey and Iran and so they are
trying to leapfrog them to Russia's long-sought objective of becoming a Middle East
power. It is in the vital interests of the United States to prevent Soviet
domination of the Middle East. World peace would be endangered if the Soviet Union
gains a dominating position in this area of the world that has such historical and
strategic importance.
The Middle East has always been a potential target for Soviet expansion
extension of its European sphere of influence.
Let me touch on the Six-Day War of June 1967 for a moment and say that both
the Soviet Union and the United States lost in that war. The United States lost
some of its options for the promotion of stability in the Middle East; the Soviet
Union lost prestige, maneuvering room and a vast amount of arms donated to the
Arabs.
Why should the United States engage in talks with the Soviet Union on the
Middle East?
We must do what we can to probe and assess Russian intentions, and we must
keep up a dialogue in order to avoid a nuclear confrontation in that area of the
world.
As for Israel and the Arab states, it may be that the U.S.-Soviet talks will
produce the broad framework for realistic negotiations between the principal
parties to the dispute. For any negotiation to begin, the parties must come to
believe that realistic negotiation is possible and act accordingly -- in good faith.
It is not hard to agree that peace is essential. What is difficult to agree
on is how to achieve peace.
It is not always accurate to apply statements made about one part of the
world to another. But I think it is worth considering here tonight some of the
statements made by President Nixon during his recent trip to Asia.
He spoke of local responsibility for peace and progress and security. He
said making and preserving peace is work that must concern the whole world. But,
he emphasized, peace can be achieved only through the resolution of conflicting
forces at work in each part of the world.
(more)
-4-
The main objective of the Nixon Administration in the Middle East is peace
peace because it is essential if the men, women and children of the area are to
live in safety and to lead creative lives peace because the governments of the
area must find a way to divert their resources from warfare to economic progress
peace because the United States can best pursue its varied interests in the Middle
East when there is peace there
peace because the United States does not wish to
become involved in a major conflict in the Middle East or any other area.
The Nixon Administration does not believe the United States or any other
major power can impose peace in the Middle East.
A real peace can only grow out of agreement among those who are in conflict.
The Nixon Administration will diligently and with all its resources help
where it can. We will help in providing security where it is needed, and we will
help in working toward agreement. But we can only help.
The Nixon Administration has carefully weighed what is required to make
peace in the Middle East and what is required to keep the peace.
The Nixon Administration is keenly aware that an imposed peace, even if it
were possible, would not likely be a permanent peace.
The Nixon Administration does not seek to impose peace in the Middle East,
but it will spare no effort to help find the road to peace.
I mentioned earlier help from the Administration is providing security. In
that connection, I would note that the first of the 50 Phantom jets now on order for
Israel will be delivered next month, and the original order of 44 Skyhawks has been
doubled to 88.
Right here in California, Israeli pilots and mechanics have been trained to
fly and maintain U.S. Phantom jets. The first class of Israeli Phantom jet pilots
was recently graduated from the U.S. training program.
What better proof can there be that the Nixon Administration is fulfilling
U.S. commitments to Israel?
It has been said that the U.S. should employ a more balanced policy in the
Middle East. If there is validity to that statement, then what should be said of
the United Nations and its practice of condemning Israel for its retaliatory raids
but only mildly reproving Arab violators of the UN cease-fire? And what too should
be said of the Arabs who currently are firing Russian-made rockets into Jerusalem?
Although the analogy is not perfect, I can readily understand Israel's
determination never to become another Czechoslovakia.
I desperately hope the war fever can be cooled. We must at least apply a
poultice.
(more)
-5-
The academic types despair and declare that there is no solution to the
Middle East situation.
We who are in government cannot afford to take such a defeatist attitude.
And I would not if we could. I believe we should pursue the immediate objective
of a Middle East arms balance while trying to create the framework for direct
negotiations between the parties to the conflict.
We should not despair in our pursuit of peace in the Middle East.
I say this because the Soviets must ultimately conclude that they have made
a bad investment in the Middle East. How many times will the Russians be willing
to go through a fiasco like the Six-Day War?
For the short term, the situation looks grim. But I remain the eternal
optimist.
Nations as well as individuals -- in the Middle East and elsehwere -- surely
recognize that peace is essential if they are to make the earth a better place to
live.
The essential elements of a peace settlement in the Middle East have been
spelled out in the UN Security Council Resolution of November 22, 1967.
The problem lies in differing interpretations of that resolution: How to
create a state of peace, how to preserve it and how, in practical ways, to guarantee
it.
I am not one of those who euphorically cry out that if America can land a
man on the moon, she can do anything.
I simply say this. We have reached the moon, and now we must help to make
each corner of the planet earth a place where human beings can live in peace.
SHALOM.
###