06-15-95 01:52PM

TO KAI

P003

JUN-15-1995 13:28 FROM DR

TO

7537248 P.02

Bilderberg Remarks

This topic was added to the agenda yesterday evening, so these will be somewhat incoherent remarks. I will begin with something that very few people have heard me say, which is that I do not claim to have an answer to the questions that I am proposing.

I'd like to discuss why I believe that a new political initiative for the North Atlantic area is essential. One: a brief comment about the American debate. It seems to me there are three different generations debating within America right now. There is the generation to which I belong which grew up in foreign policy views during World War II and the post-war reconstruction and that basically believes in an important geo-political role for America and which believes that on the whole, the American role has been beneficial, constructive, and essential. Then there's the generation whose formative experience was in the Vietnam war that, on the whole, believes that American intervention abroad has not always been beneficial, that it has often reflected grave faults in the American society, and that these faults have to be remedied first. And that insofar as we are active abroad, it should be more in the direction of human rights and other improvements than in the more political strategic orientation. I would say that the Vietnam generation's span of formative experience is relatively briefer than that of my generation - about ten years, I would say.

Then there is the post-Vietnam generation, which is now at stake, which has a more constructive attitude about the role of America; on the whole more conservative but which does not have a clearly articulated view of what that means in foreign policy. They are clearer about what it means in domestic policy. Their concerns, speaking now for Americans, have to be given some content, some sense of direction and, since they're Americans, some cause for which they can commit themselves. This is happening at a time when all over the world every major country is facing a situation which is unprecedented for it. The US is in a world which it can neither dominate, nor can it withdraw from, which it has not experienced in that way before; without a strategic enemy, without a clear cut ideological enemy, in a world of five or six more or less equal powers in their capacity to effect events. We may be the only military super-power, but the events that can be effected by military force are shrinking and are very specialized, like Yugoslavia. How to operate in a world in which logic requires equilibrium, experience in America forms no basis for it. And the ideology of Americans, so far as we have one, rejects it. It is an intellectual challenge for the US. Theoretically, we could play the role of Britain in the nineteenth century; splendid isolation, backing the weaker against the stronger. But to do that on a global scale would run

R-96%

JUN-15-1995 13:47

2127656817

06-15-95 01:38PM P002 #46

97%

P.03

06-15-95 01:52PM

TO KAI

P004

JUN-15-1995 13:29 FROM DR

TO

7537248

P.03

too contrary to basic American convictions.

Europe is in the process of forming itself. The nation-state is too small to be a global player. But what institutions - indeed what limits Europe has. It's still up for grabs, as we experienced this morning. Russia is within borders it has not known since Peter the Great. And even if it is forming a democracy, it is doing it without the traditions that generated it in the western world, with a state church, not a separation between church and state, with no enlightenment, with no capitalism and with no practical experience of democracy at a moment when it has to adjust to a loss of empire. China will be a huge player in the next century. And the issue is what is presented here today repeatedly; that one has to educate, encourage China to be restrained. It is possible that the weight of China will be so great that whatever the formal intentions of the Chinese leadership and will profoundly effect the attitude. Last year I was in Kabarov for refueling and the governor came to the airport and said I couldn't leave without seeing what they were up against. He insisted on showing me the Chinese border and I thought I'd find a thousand tanks there or something horrifying. There is nothing there. Empty territory; a few villages. There was nothing frightening to see but for him. He saw the billion people on the other side and that is a consciousness that the Russians grow increasingly conscious of. And it will put a limit to the degree to which they can afford to break with the West on most of the issues that we have been discussing this morning. I believe that inevitably Japan is going to move out of the American security relationship to some extent, will be driven to a more national policy and will analyze its interests in Asia not exactly parallel to the United States - not necessarily outside of the United States -- and will become a major international player on its own. I mention all of this much too briefly only in order to stress the basic question. Should these huge changes that are taking place, including the huge changes in the Islamic world and the growth of India as a potential super power - should they be dealt with by the nations of the west individually or as a group? I believe that any attempt to deal with them on a regional or national basis alone will in practice lead to a continuation or to a resumption of the western civil war that started in 1914, ended in 1945, and would exhaust the western values and institutions. I would add, moreover, another question which I am not qualified to deal with in any substance. Nobody is more committed to friendship with China than I am. But you cannot travel through China, or Southeast Asia, or the beginning in India and see these huge industrial capacities that are being built there without at least asking the question whether at some point this will not lead, either to a substantial lowering of western standards of living or to a need to reorient our societies in a fundamental way to avoid a fundamental lowering. And this seems to be another issue we ought to deal with together. As far as the United States is concerned....I have said before that I do not believe we can conduct a global balance of power policy and be true to our

R-96%

JUN-15-1995 13:48

2127656817

06-15-95 01:38PM

P003 #46

97%

P.04

06-15-95 01:52PM

TO KAI

P005

JUN-15-1995 13:30 FROM DR

TO

7537248 P.04

genius. It is no accident that Wilsonism became the dominant philosophy, much as one can shoot holes in it intellectually. On the other hand, we have no choice in certain areas of the world. We keep talking about a Pacific community. The fact of the matter is that the relation of the Asian nations to each other is most similar to that of the European nations to each other in the nineteenth century. Japan, China, Korea, India, Southeast Asia do not look at each other as part of a community but as strategic opponents. And there we have no choice except a certain equilibrium. Therefore, I conclude by saying that we in the West need to address these problems in some community form. I have advocated NATO expansion. In my view that is a way to avoid Debacles. It is not a way by itself to hold us together. I have proposed a North Atlantic Free Trade Zone, but I would be open to some other institution. What we need is that our leaders put before us some concept on which we can work now, which is not social reform or some technical problem, but which will perform the most important function of the Marshall Plan, which was not transferring money but which was to set a common goal which enabled Europe and America to work on a common objective. I've outlined a few of them, much to sketchily, but I would think the most important thing we can do is to set a goal, get some working groups going, including military but not primarily military, to address some of the questions that I have raised, to which many more could be added if there were time.

R-96%

JUN-15-1995 13:48

2127656817

97%

TOTAL P.04

06-15-95 01:38PM P004 #46

P.05