- 16 -

#33

Q. Might that come during the economic summit Friday and Saturday, for instance in the opening remarks of the President to the assembled group, or anything like that?

MR. NESSEN: I don't know that, Jim. In the next few days, we hope.

Q. Can we expect when Mr. Rumsfeld arrives that more former Nixon men will go out of the White House pretty fast? In other words, can we expect a faster house cleaning?

MR. NESSEN: They are each going to be handled on an individual basis.

Q. Ron, going back to what you said on the day you were named, which is that you would never intentionally lie or never intentionally or knowingly deceive, what sort of understanding do you have with the President on that? What sort of guidelines or assurances or whatever you want to call them, can you tell us, that he has given you, and therefore us, on that?

MR. NESSEN: Well, all of the things I said to you on that day I had said to him in my conversation with him on the day before. And since he offered me the job after hearing all those things, I assumed that he understood why I was taking the job.

I must say, on a personal basis that in my four or five days here, I have not encountered any problem along that line and in fact I would say the access to the President and the other senior adviers is greater than I had anticipated. And they are, as far as I can tell, keeping me informed of all the major things going on here and, if I have questions, I am able to reach them without any problem and get my questions answered.

Q. Ron, if this question has already been asked -- I wasn't here yesterday -- forgive me.

MR. NESSEN: I wasn't here yesterday, either. Nobody was here yesterday. We were all in Detroit.

Q. Fine. Then I can ask it. Based on the words of Secretary Kissinger yesterday and the President yesterday, certain Arab newspapers and other sources are reading between the lines and extracting what they call war talk. I wonder if you would address that.

MORE

#33

- 17 -

#33

MR. NESSEN: Would you say the last part of your question beginning with the war talk again?

Q Yes, certain Arab newspapers are reading between the lines of the Secretary's and the President's speeches yesterday and interpreting between the lines to discover what they claim to be war threat or war talk by the leaders of this country, and I wonder if you would comment on that.

MR. NESSEN: Well, I think the President's speech and also Kissinger's speech speak for themselves. I would say that the President's speech and the Secretary's speech were candid and very practical speeches which address the realities facing the world.

In connection with the reports you talk about, I do want to call your attention to the paragraphs in the President's speech in which he said that the theme of this Administration's foreign policy is international cooperation and that in the nuclear age there is no rational alternative to international cooperation.

Q As long as we are on that subject, Ron, Secretary Kissinger in his speech in New York said again, as he had before, that the world faced the possibility of a depression and he specifically used that word "depression" as he has at least once before, and he used it several times.

But the President told us at his last press conference that there would be no depression. Can you reconcile those?

MR. NESSEN: I don't recall what the context of the Secretary's reference to depression was.

Q It was that if the situation confronting us on oil prices and inflation resulting from oil prices was not solved, the world faced the possibility of a depression, or words to that effect.

MR. NESSEN: I think we will have to let the Secretary's speech stand by itself, Jim.

MORE

#33

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

December 18, 1974

Office of the White House Press Secretary

THE WHITE HOUSE

The White House staff organization announced in today's briefing has been evolving since August 9. The working style of this President is reflected in this arrangement. It implements his concept of leadership and management of the Executive Branch, and conforms to the way President Ford operates.

The President designed the organization with several important objectives in mind:

1) To provide the Cabinet Officers, Agency Heads, Members of Congress and Senior Staff members with access to the President.

2) To limit the White House staff function to those that must necessarily be performed within the White House. The Cabinet and Agency heads will be relied upon to perform all appropriate functions best performed by their organizations.

3) To achieve a clearly defined White House organization in which staff responsibilities and functions are specifically assigned.

4) To assure high ethical standards and behavior by his staff.

5) To see that the White House is an effective working part of the total governmental process and not unduly separated.

To accomplish these objectives, the President today is making several announcements concerning the organizational structure and procedures for the White House staff and those staff bodies in the Executive Office of the President:

First, there are four Cabinet rank advisors who will be available to the President on the full range of policy issues. Each will also have staff responsibilities.

Second, nine key staff officers will report directly to the President. They are:

* An Assistant to the President for Management and Budget, and Director of OMB;

* An Assistant to the President for Economic Affairs, and Executive Director of the Economic Policy Board, L. William Seidman;

* An Assistant to the President for Domestic Affairs, and Executive Director of the Domestic Council;

more

2

An Assistant to the President dealing with national security affairs, Henry A. Kissinger

An Assistant to the President heading the White House Operations Office and with responsibility for coordination of White House staff operations, Donald Rumsfeld

A Counsellor to the President principally responsible for congressional relations and public liaison, John O. Marsh, Jr.

The Press Secretary to the President, Ronald H. Nessen

A Counsellor to the President principally responsible for the Editorial Office and political affairs, Robert T. Hartmann; and

The legal Counsel to the President, Philip W. Buchen.

Third, other staff members will, of course, also work directly with the President.

These officers include the Assistant to the President for Legislative Affairs, Max L. Friedersdorf; the Assistant to the President for Public Liaison, William J. Baroody, Jr.; as well as the Special Assistant to the President for Minority Affairs, the Special Assistant to the President for Human Resources, the Special Assistant to the President for Hispanic Affairs, the Special Assistant to the President for Consumer Affairs, and the Special Assistant to the President for Women among others.

Fourth, key staff members will have a deputy authorized to act for him. It is hoped that this will allow the work at the White House to go forward even though one or more senior officials may be away from their office. Thus, no one individual will be "indispensable" and this approach should help to alleviate the excessively long hours which can prevent White House staff members from leading reasonably balanced lives.

Fifth, titles of the White House staff positions have been adjusted so that they will more clearly identify the function performed by that position.

Sixth, the size of the White House Office is being reduced by approximately ten percent.

Seventh, support services to the White House staff will be reduced as appropriate to reflect the staff size and responsibilities.

Eighth, the President's schedule is being arranged to provide broad access to him by Cabinet members, agency heads, members of the House and Senate and the public on matters in which he is personally involved.

Ninth, the number of Presidential commissions issued will be limited to staff members heading key offices or key functions.

These arrangements have been decided upon with the aim of facilitating an orderly Presidential decision making process while assuring the President of multiple sources of information. Of course, the White House organization will continue to evolve.

# # # #

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

DECEMBER 18, 1974

THE WHITE HOUSE

FACT SHEET

PRINCIPAL FUNCTIONS OF MAJOR OFFICES
SHOWN ON ORGANIZATION CHART

CABINET RANK ADVISERS

Consult with the President on the full range
of policy issues as requested.

Participate in Cabinet meetings.

OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET*

ECONOMIC POLICY BOARD*

DOMESTIC COUNCIL*

NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL*

WHITE HOUSE OPERATIONS OFFICE

Performs the staff functions directly supporting
the President's day-to-day activities

OFFICE OF THE CABINET SECRETARY

Serve as Secretary to the Cabinet

Assist the President in schedule planning

Make advance preparations for Presidential
travel

OFFICE OF THE STAFF SECRETARY

Assist in ensuring a smooth flow of
coordinated information and decision-
papers to the President

Assists in communicating Presidential decisions
and requests to the staff

Act as administrative officer of the White
House Office

OFFICE OF WHITE HOUSE VISITORS

Supervise arrangements for group and
public tours of the White House

PRESIDENTIAL PERSONNEL OFFICE

Provide staff assistance to the President
as requested in the exercise of his
authority to nominate and appoint personnel
to Federal office

MILITARY ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT

Provide operational support to the
President in his role as Commander in Chief

*See United States Government Manual (1974-75) and governing statutes and Executive Orders.

more

(OVER)

2

OFFICE OF COUNSELLOR TO THE PRESIDENT JOHN O. MARSH, JR.

* Assist the President in his relations with Congress and oversee the Congressional Relations Office

* Assist the President in his relations with non-governmental individuals

* Monitor preparations for the Bicentennial for the President

OFFICE OF CONGRESSIONAL RELATIONS

* Assist the President in maintaining clear two-way communications with the Congress

OFFICE OF PUBLIC LIAISON

* Assist the President to maintain contacts with non-governmental organizations

OFFICE OF THE PRESS SECRETARY

* Assist the President in presentation of his views to the national and foreign press and through them to the public.

OFFICE OF COUNSELLOR TO THE PRESIDENT ROBERT T. HARTMANN

* Assist the President in his preparation of materials for speeches and formal communications

* Oversee the Editorial Office for the President

* Advise the President on political matters

EDITORIAL OFFICE

* Assist the President in preparation of his speeches and formal communications

OFFICE OF THE COUNSEL

* Provide legal counsel to the President on matters involving the conduct of his office

# # # #

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

DECEMBER 18, 1974

THE WHITE HOUSE

FACT SHEET

COMMISSIONED WHITE HOUSE STAFF

(Excludes Commissioned Officers whose resignations have
been announced)

Philip W. Buchen Counsel to the President
Robert T. Hartmann Counsellor to the President
Henry A. Kissinger Assistant to the President
John O. Marsh, Jr. Counsellor to the President
Donald Rumsfeld Assistant to the President
Assistant to the President for Management and Budget
Ronald H. Nessen Press Secretary to the President
L. William Seidman Assistant to the President for Economic Affairs
Assistant to the President for Domestic Affairs
William J. Baroody Assistant to the President for Public Liaison
Max L. Friedersdorf Assistant to the President for Legislative Affairs
Phillip E. Areeda Counsel to the President
Richard Cheney Deputy Assistant to the President
Jack Hushen Deputy Press Secretary to the President
Brent Scowcroft Deputy Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs
William Casselman Counsel to the President
Robert Goldwin Special Consultant to the President
Jerry Warren Deputy Press Secretary to the President
Deputy Assistant to the President for Legislative Affairs (Senate)
Deputy Assistant to the President for Legislative Affairs (House)

more

(OVER)

2

<table><tr><td>Fernando DeBaca</td><td>Special Assistant to the President for Hispanic Affairs</td></tr><tr><td>Jerry Jones</td><td>Staff Secretary</td></tr><tr><td>Virginia Knauer</td><td>Special Assistant to the President for Consumer Affairs</td></tr><tr><td>Richard Lawson</td><td>Military Assistant to the President</td></tr><tr><td>Kenneth Lazarus</td><td>Associate Counsel to the President</td></tr><tr><td>Patricia Lindh</td><td>Special Assistant to the President for Women's Affairs</td></tr><tr><td>Theodore Marrs</td><td>Special Assistant to the President for Human Resources</td></tr><tr><td>Paul Miltich</td><td>Assistant Press Secretary to the President</td></tr><tr><td>Stanley S. Scott</td><td>Special Assistant to the President for Minority Affairs</td></tr><tr><td>Paul Theis</td><td>Executive Editor</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">William Walker</td><td>Director, Presidential Personnel Office</td></tr><tr><td>Cabinet Secretary</td></tr></table>

# # # #

- 25 -

#104-12/18

Q Ron, two questions, if I might, unrelated questions. Does the President plan to hold a press conference before departing for Vail?

MR. NESSEN: We don't have anything to announce, Jim.

Q Is that a possibility?

MR. NESSEN: I cannot give it to you today, Tom. I have not got anything to give you today.

Q I would like to ask another question about what appears to be a great deal of public speculation in meetings and sort of informally around the country about the possibility that the United States was planning an invasion of one or more Arab countries, to take them over and secure their oil fields or encouraging an Israeli invasion of one or more Arab countries to do the same thing. What assurance can you give the American people in this public forum about this concern or this speculation that appears to be quite widespread around the country?

MR. NESSEN: Well, I think we have said here before that the speculation along those lines is irresponsible. There have been some reports, some specific published reports, which we have said are irresponsible and they are irresponsible.

Q They are not true?

MR. NESSEN: In answer to Helen's question, I have heard the President, and maybe some of you have heard the President, say specifically that he knows of no plans to do anything like that.

Q Would the President, for all time, rule out the use of American armed force in the Middle East to secure oil fields?

MR. NESSEN: I think even the question is irresponsible, Jim, and the President said he knows of no plans to do anything like that.

MORE

#104

- 26 -

#104-12/18

Q I don't think it is irresponsible.
Using the President's phrase, I respectfully disagree.
The people who are talking about this thing are looking
to the White House for guidance.

MR. NESSEN: I am giving you the guidance that
any such speculation is irresponsible, and the President
does not know of any such plans.

Q What makes the question irresponsible?

MR. NESSEN: The question will cause further
speculation about something which is irresponsible.

Q My original question was what you could
say to lay to rest this speculation.

MR. NESSEN: That this speculation is
irresponsible, and the President knows of no such
plans.

Q Ron, you used that phrase, "The President
knows of no such plans" about four times. It seems to
be carefully prepared.

MR. NESSEN: Because that is what he says when
people ask him about this.

Q Is there a possibility that such planning
might be going on and that he would not know of it?

MR. NESSEN: Do you think the President would
not know of such plans?

Q That is why I am asking you.

MR. NESSEN: I cannot imagine such a thing.

Q If the President does not want to do
something like this couldn't he just make a point of
making sure that nobody is doing any planning like this?

MR. NESSEN: I think he has certainly gone out
of his way to indicate his feeling about these
irresponsible stories and speculation.

MORE

#104

- 27 -

#104-12/18

Q Are you saying there are no NSC memos outlining such possible steps in the case of ---

MR. NESSEN: Helen, I am saying the President knows of no plans for any such action.

Q Ron, is there anything you can say about reports out of Moscow that the Soviet Union will have no part of a U.S.-Soviet trade agreement that is conditioned on Soviet emigration policy?

MR. NESSEN: I have not seen the stories, Russ.

Q Would you check on it, please?

MR. NESSEN: All right.

THE PRESS: Thank you, Ron.

END

(AT 1:05 P.M. EST)

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

November 18, 1974

THE WHITE HOUSE

1. To provide the Cabinet Officers, Agency Heads, Members of Congress and Senior Staff members with access to the President.

2. To limit the White House staff function to those that must necessarily be performed within the White House. The Cabinet and Agency heads will be relied upon to perform all appropriate functions best performed by their organizations.

3. To achieve a clearly defined White House organization in which staff responsibilities and functions are specifically assigned.

4. To assure high ethical standards and behavior by his staff.

5. To see that the White House is an effective working part of the total governmental process and not unduly separated.

more

2

An Assistant to the President dealing with national security affairs, Henry A. Kissinger.

An Assistant to the President heading the White House Operations Office and with responsibility for coordination of White House staff operations, Donald Rumsfeld.

A Counsellor to the President principally responsible for congressional relations and public liaison, John O. Marsh, Jr.:

The Press Secretary to the President, Ronald H. Nessen.

# # # #

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

DECEMBER 18, 1974

THE WHITE HOUSE

FACT SHEET

| Name | Title |
| :--- | :--- |
| Philip W. Buchen | Counsel to the President |
| Robert T. Hartmann | Counsellor to the President |
| Henry A. Kissinger | Assistant to the President |
| John O. Marsh, Jr. | Counsellor to the President |
| Donald Rumsfeld | Assistant to the President |
| | Assistant to the President for Management and Budget |
| Ronald H. Nessen | Press Secretary to the President |
| L. William Seidman | Assistant to the President for Economic Affairs |
| | Assistant to the President for Domestic Affairs |
| William J. Baroody | Assistant to the President for Public Liaison |
| Max L. Friedersdorf | Assistant to the President for Legislative Affairs |
| Phillip E. Areeda | Counsel to the President |
| Richard Cheney | Deputy Assistant to the President |
| Jack Hushen | Deputy Press Secretary to the President |
| Brent Scowcroft | Deputy Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs |
| William Casselman | Counsel to the President |
| Robert Goldwin | Special Consultant to the President |
| Jerry Warren | Deputy Press Secretary to the President |
| | Deputy Assistant to the President for Legislative Affairs (Senate) |
| | Deputy Assistant to the President for Legislative Affairs (House) |

Fernando DeBaca
Special Assistant to the President
for Hispanic Affairs

Jerry Jones
Staff Secretary

Virginia Knauer
Special Assistant to the President
for Consumer Affairs

Richard Lawson
Military Assistant to the President

Kenneth Lazarus
Associate Counsel to the President

Patricia Lindh
Special Assistant to the President
for Women's Affairs

Theodore Marrs
Special Assistant to the President
for Human Resources

Paul Miltich
Assistant Press Secretary
to the President

Stanley S. Scott
Special Assistant to the President
for Minority Affairs

Paul Theis
Executive Editor

William Walker
Director, Presidential
Personnel Office

Cabinet Secretary

# # # #

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

DECEMBER 18, 1974

THE WHITE HOUSE

FACT SHEET

CABINET RANK ADVISERS

ECONOMIC POLICY BOARD*

DOMESTIC COUNCIL*

NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL*

WHITE HOUSE OPERATIONS OFFICE

OFFICE OF THE STAFF SECRETARY

Assist in ensuring a smooth flow of
coordinated information and decision
papers to the President

PRESIDENTIAL PERSONNEL OFFICE

MEMORANDUM

NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL

URGENT

ACTION

December 20, 1974

MEMORANDUM FOR: ALL NSC STAFF

FROM: CLINT GRANGER

SUBJECT: State of the Union

I would appreciate receiving by 4 p.m. today draft language on topics which
might be used in the State of the Union speech.

We will be responsible for a Defense and Foreign Policy section of roughly
ten minutes in length, and should also contribute to sections of similar length
on energy and the economy insofar as foreign factors are involved. In the
case of the latter, the President intends to stress the interdependence of our
nation with others.

In general, as a matter of tone, the material should be presented in personal
terms suitable for an appeal by Mr. Ford directly to the people of the United
States and the members of Congress. It should

-- look forward to the next two years rather than back at the past,

-- stress our determination and ability to turn great problems to great advantage, and

-- maintain our satisfaction with the general structure of our
diplomacy (detente, arms control, step-by-step approach to the
Middle East, etc.)

State and Defense drafts, which were due yesterday, and should have provided
you a basis for your own thoughts, are late.

Administration of Gerald R. Ford

PRESIDENTIAL DOCUMENTS

Week Ending Friday, December 20, 1974

Meetings With President Valery
Giscard d'Estaing of France

*Exchange of Remarks Between*
*President Giscard d'Estaing and President Ford*
*at the Welcoming Ceremony in Martinique.*

December 14, 1974

PRESIDENT GISCARD D'ESTAING. Dear Mr. President, it is a great honor for this French land of the West Indies to welcome the President of the United States of America.

It is a real pleasure for me to extend to you, and to all
those accompanying you, a most cordial welcome. As
soon as you came into office, we both felt that we should
establish a direct and personal contact. Such a contact
is in keeping with the traditional relations between France
and the United States. And in the present circumstances,
we thought this would be especially useful.

Faced with the enormous changes taking place through-
out the world, our two countries have, in different
capacities and to various degrees, responsibilities to bear.

Belonging to the community of liberal democracies,
their personality and their situation leave them some-
times—quite naturally, I would say—to assume different
stands in the face of such changes. However, too old are
their ties of friendship for them not to wish to harmonize
such stands whenever necessary, and they are too deeply
attached to the same ideal of freedom, progress, and peace
not to be determined to succeed.

All this points to the importance of our meeting, as
stressed by our partners in the European community, hence
also—the frankness and cordiality with which I trust
our talks will start and be concluded.

Mr. President, France of the Martinique offers to you, and all those accompanying you, its charm and its beauty. From the bottom of our heart, I wish you an excellent stay.

Welcome, Mr President.

PRESIDENT FORD. Mr. President, Madame Giscard d'Estaing, ladies and gentlemen:

Thank you for your most gracious welcome to this
beautiful, gorgeous island. I am delighted to be here.

Mr. President, this is an opportunity for us to become
personally acquainted and to discuss the serious issues
which confront our two countries. Our meeting vividly
demonstrates the importance we attach to working
together.

General Lafayette stopped here on his way to assist
America to achieve its independence. The friendship of
our two countries spans the oceans as well as the centuries.
It is fitting that you and I, both given responsibilities
for leadership in our respective countries this year, are
taking this early opportunity to address problems of com-
mon interest and common concern.

We must combine our efforts with those of our friends
and our allies if we are to meet the challenges of the last
quarter of the 20th century. The list of the challenges is
long, including such vital issues as food, energy, finance,
and, of course, the fundamental security of our people
and the quest for further reductions in international
tensions.

Just as our talks mark the beginning of a personal rela-
tionship, I am confident that our nations will reaffirm the
tradition of Franco-American cooperation in great
endeavors.

I look forward to our meetings for the exchanges they
will permit and our resulting understandings. In meeting
here, we, of course, will be mindful not only of American
and French interests but the contributions our efforts can
make toward a more peaceful, stable, and prosperous
world.

NOTE: The exchange of remarks began at 4:53 p.m. at Lamentin Airport, Martinique, French West Indies. President Giscard d'Estaing spoke in French, and his remarks were translated by an interpreter.

Death of Walter Lippmann

Statement by the President. December 14, 1974

With the death of Walter Lippmann, we have lost a
great American. As a newsman, political analyst, and
author, Walter Lippmann played a major role for more
than half a century in the development of public dialog
and in shaping a new standard of journalism.

Volume 10—Number 51

1567

1568

PRESIDENTIAL DOCUMENTS: GERALD R. FORD, 1974

Mr. Lippmann's contributions to the good society which he envisioned for his country will long be remembered.

NOTE: Walter Lippmann, 85, died in New York City on Saturday, December 14, 1974.

Mr. Lippmann served as editor of The New Republic magazine from 1914 to 1921. He also wrote a nationally syndicated newspaper column, Today and Tomorrow, from 1931 to 1967, for which he received the Pulitzer Prize in 1958 and 1962.

He was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom on September 14, 1964.

The statement was released at Martinique, French West Indies.

## Trade Bill

*Statement by the President Following Senate Action on the Bill. December 14, 1974*

On behalf of all Americans, I would like to thank the United States Senate for approving the foreign trade bill. The House has already passed the bill. We are especially grateful to the leaders of both parties. Thanks to their strong, bipartisan efforts we are now in a position to launch a trade program that will strengthen our economy and further our efforts for peace. The Senate has demonstrated a willingness to set aside party differences when the interests of our Nation are at stake.

With this sort of continued compromise and cooperation between the executive and legislative branches of Government, I am more confident than ever that working together we will continue to develop comprehensive programs to meet all our Nation's needs.

NOTE: The statement was released at Martinique, French West Indies.

## Meetings With President Valery Giscard d'Estaing of France

*Exchange of Toasts Between President Giscard d'Estaing and President Ford at a Dinner Hosted by the French President. December 14, 1974*

PRESIDENT GISCARD D'ESTAING. Mr. President, a meeting between France and the United States is always a rendezvous of freedom and friendship. And what could be a better place for it than this island of Martinique which cherishes the proud memory of having served as a naval base for the French Fleet during the American War of Independence, and, in 2 years' time, we will be celebrating together the successful outcome of that event.

It was in the name of freedom that our friendship was

born, and we shall celebrate its 200th anniversary at the same time as the Bicentennial of American independence.

It was also in the name of freedom that twice in the course of this century the active solidarity of the United States enabled France to preserve or to regain her independence.

Different as we may be, what appeals so much to us, the French, is all that in the United States symbolizes and means freedom: your vast spaces, your openness to new ideas and bold endeavors, your mastery of technology, which gives man his power over nature and lightens his burden.

Freedom and friendship have stamped their mark on the relations between our two countries. Freedom allows for their frankness and independence; friendship demands mutual understanding and cooperation.

This spirit of free dialog and trust between partners who recognize the equality of their rights and duties, even if they are not equal in terms of resources or power, is characteristic of Franco-American relations, and there is nothing to prevent that the same spirit be applied to solving the major problems of the world today.

For our part, we express the wish that this spirit inspire the relations between the United States and the Europe that we are striving patiently—and we are bound to say slowly—to build.

It is only on condition that it can exist by its own accord that Europe will be for the United States a firm and reliable partner and for the world a factor of balance and peace.

We also wish that this spirit of dialog should govern our thinking on the profound changes in the world scene.

As you were mentioning, you, yourself, Mr. President, on your arrival here, the path of consultation which is as far removed from that of confrontation as it is from that of capitulation is the only one which is in keeping with the political, economic, and human needs of our time.

It is the path we followed when it was time to emerge from the cold war and, on our war-torn continent, to organize détente, entente, and cooperation, while maintaining actively our desire for independence in safeguarding our security. It is the path we recommend be followed in the Middle East where, in spite of the remarkable efforts of American diplomacy and the useful progress it has achieved, the situation remains a threatening one.

A just and lasting settlement must, in our view, take into account the three legitimate aspirations of all parties concerned, those of the State of Israel, to live in peace within secure and guaranteed boundaries; those of the Arab states, to recover their territorial integrity; and those of the Palestinian people, to have, as all peoples, a homeland.

It is also through consultation that we shall succeed in finding a solution to the problem caused by the increase in oil prices. This in no way excludes a prior harmonization,

Volume 10—Number 51

1569

tion of the positions within each of the major categories involved.

It, however, presupposes that the purpose of this harmonization process be to prepare the meeting at the same table and at a fixed date of countries willing to reconcile their respective points of view in the peaceful interests of the world.

Mr. President, we shall be having talks in a climate of mutual trust on all these subjects of concern to the world today. These talks will once again demonstrate that the frankness of our discussions draws us together much more than it divides us, as should be between partners and allies when they have for each other, as I have for your country, a sense of their dignity and their sovereignty.

Mr. President, we all deeply regret the absence of Mrs. Ford, and I would like to ask you to be kind enough to convey to her our very warm and respectful wishes for a prompt recovery.

I drink this toast in your honor, Mr. President, as well as to the great people of the United States, to whom the French people, through me, extend their greetings in testimony of our two centuries old and ever young friendships like our two countries.

Thank you.

PRESIDENT FORD. Mr. President, the hospitality extended to me has reflected in the warmth of the climate of this most remarkable island and the spirit of your kind words of welcome, and I am deeply grateful.

I am very, very proud to be the first American President in office to visit this part of the Caribbean, and I would like to express again my appreciation to you personally for suggesting Martinique as the location of our first meeting.

The United States and France, we all know, have been very, very close. We have been extremely close friends for over two centuries. From our American Revolution through the darkest days of World War II, our countries have stood together in moments of crisis. And, today, of fundamental importance to our countries and to the West, a strong Atlantic Alliance safeguards our security.

As old friends and allies, Mr. President, we have much to talk about. On many, many points we shall agree; on others we may differ. But it is of the greatest importance, in my judgment, that we will talk with full candor since we share the same ideals. A relationship of confidence is absolutely essential. It is only through such a relationship. Mr. President, that our common objectives can best be served and our differing views reconciled.

As in the past, we jointly face, Mr. President, major challenges. This time the immediate danger is not war but the problems of peace: inflation, balance of payments deficits, energy shortages, and, for many throughout the world, shortages of food itself. These problems unfortunately accentuate the interdependence of nations and the need for communication and cooperation.

At stake is the stability of every economy, the welfare of every nation. Unilateral measures, Mr. President, can no longer suffice in solving problems of such universal dimension.

Mr. President, you recently described this situation very vividly when you said the world is unhappy. Indeed, the world is troubled. But if we are to transcend our difficulties and successfully meet our challenges, we, France and the United States, must cooperate.

We face a major problem in the field of energy. In dealing with it on the basis of consumer solidarity, we seek constructive dialog, not confrontation. The United States is convinced that cooperation and solidarity among the consumer nations mark the surest way to reach understanding with the producer nations which we all desire.

I am also looking forward, Mr. President, to exchanging impressions on East-West relations and on our recent meetings with General Secretary Brezhnev. I am sure we will all agree that all of us in the West will benefit from close relationships as the policy of détente continues to develop.

Our interdependence requires that we—together with our friends and our partners—join in concerted measures or responses to the dangers which confront us all. Let us continue our historic relationship with renewed spirit and redoubled effort, as good and responsible friends.

Our common heritage gives me confidence that we will continue our joint endeavors for peace and stability in the world. Mr. President, it is with this objective that I look forward to our discussions tomorrow. I have every hope that our talks will strengthen the friendship between us, both in a bilateral sense and also as members of the alliance which Americans regard as the cornerstone of our foreign policy.

Ladies and gentlemen, in the spirit of strengthening our historic ties, I ask all of you to stand and to raise your glasses in honor of the President of the French Republic and his lovely wife.

NOTE: The exchange of toasts began at 9:51 p.m. at the Prefect's Residence, Fort-de-France, Martinique, French West Indies. President Giscard d'Estaing spoke in French, and his remarks were translated by an interpreter.

*Exchange of Toasts Between President Ford and President Giscard d'Estaing at an Informal Dinner Hosted by President Ford. December 15, 1974*

PRESIDENT FORD. Mr. President, Madame Giscard d'Estaing, our distinguished guests:

Let me say with great personal conviction and strong feelings, we have enjoyed being here in a part of France.

Volume 10—Number 51

1570

[Lc]

The warmth of the welcome of the people, the superb atmosphere created by the beauties of nature have made this trip a wonderful experience for all of us.

Mr. President, the United States within a relatively few months is going to be celebrating our 200th anniversary. Whenever we think about that anniversary, we can't help but feel the participation that France played in the achievement of our independence. July 4, 1976, will bring back many, many memories of the help and assistance that France gave to our country at a very difficult and controversial period in our early history in America.

It is my understanding, Mr. President, that one of your ancestors, Admiral d'Estaing, did have an interest in and did help us at a period when we, the United States, were in our formative years. For that we thank you, and for all of the other great Frenchmen who were assisting America in our early days.

It is my understanding, Mr. President, that France is making a very meaningful contribution to our 200th anniversary with the "Sight and Sound" program that will be a highlight in Washington for the many, many thousands who will visit the Nation's Capital. We thank you for this contribution and we are grateful for your feeling that France should participate in this way.

If I might now turn to our own personal relationship, which I say without any hesitancy or qualification—it was a pleasure to meet you and to have the opportunity of broadening a relationship and developing a friendship. It seems to me this can be meaningful in our relations between France and the United States. But even more meaningful, on a far broader basis, I am grateful for your statesmanship; I am most appreciative for your views that we have exchanged here on this occasion in a part of France.

And so, Mr. President, may I offer a toast to you and Madame Giscard d'Estaing and to the Republic of France. It is a pleasure and a privilege.

PRESIDENT GISCARD D'ESTAING. Mr. President, ladies and gentlemen:

Mr. President, we have both come into office very recently, only a few months ago, and so—this is a source of deep satisfaction—we are both extremely young. Indeed, one can say it is a secret of youth, in fact, to be elected President.

Now, we are, however, young Presidents of countries whose relations are very longstanding, indeed, as you yourself have just mentioned. And indeed, all you have to do is to look behind you at Fort-de-France—Fort-de-France, which has carried that name for three centuries, and two centuries ago, harbored the French fleet that sailed off the coast of the then young and new United States.

I would add that the relations between France and the United States are not merely a matter of what you might call the picturesque site of history, or simply a matter of stories on the subject. No, it is something which

reflects a deep and reciprocal mutual interest; it is something which has been borne out in numerous circumstances. For instance, when at the time of the First World War the United States came to the defense of France, the landing of the Americans on French territory was met with tremendous enthusiasm on the part of the French population.

And so, when at the end of the Second World War, I, myself, was involved in the last stages of the war, the unit that I served in was a part of the First French Army which, itself, was under the Seventh United States Army.

But the great problems of our times—even to those of us who, like ourselves, are deeply attached to tradition—the big problems of our time, I say, are in fact ahead of us and will call for considerable imagination and action. And that is why it was very important for me, Mr. President, to know whether these new problems and tasks could, in fact, be tackled with the very great country that you represent in a spirit of openness and mutual understanding.

And so, it was important for me to establish this personal contact with you, yourself, sir, and the distinguished persons accompanying you. And yesterday morning, when I was meeting you at the airport, it occurred to me that during these two days we were in fact going to, perhaps, take initiatives and perform actions which would lead to solutions which could well have a lasting effect not only on our own relations, but also, perhaps, on world affairs.

The results of our talks will be embodied in a communique which will be issued at the end of tomorrow morning, and if I were to divulge right now what the results of our talks have been, this would deprive the members of our staff from the pleasures of the late evening and early morning during which they would engage in the arduous task of preparing the suitable form of words.

But what I can say something about is the atmosphere of our talks, and what I would like to mention is their very cordial nature, the very simple way in which our talks have proceeded, the great frankness and the clarity of your positions, and the great competence with which you have led our discussions.

Now, on international gatherings or occasions such as this, people tend to wonder, in fact, who won, who came out on top, who gave the concessions, who, in fact, was the victor. But at the very outset, you will recall that I said it was my hope that, in fact, there would be neither a matter of concessions nor victors in a case like this, but we should both emerge from these talks with the feeling that we had, in fact, achieved something useful, realistic, and worthwhile in furthering the solutions of the problems that we are in fact discussing.

And could I say very sincerely, Mr. President, how very much Madame Giscard d'Estaing and myself deeply regret the absence of Mrs. Ford. We had been looking forward very much to meeting her here on this occasion,

Volume 10—Number 51

1571

and I may say that some of the arrangements that had been made had been made precisely in anticipation of the pleasure of, for instance, having her with us today at lunch.

Now, there is one great advantage of this situation, and that is that the rights of international affairs dictate that one cannot, twice running, invite the same head of state. That means, therefore, that despite the great pleasure that this would afford us, it would not be possible for us to invite you, sir, again so soon. But we could, of course, invite Mrs. Ford. And we would very much hope that she would accept, and that you would be kind enough to accompany her.

Now, people in this world of ours very often ask themselves all sorts of questions and, indeed, one of the things they often wonder about, apparently, is why statesmen, in fact, are statesmen and why they accept to sacrifice many aspects of their existence to the responsibilities of state.

Now, as far as you are concerned—and I have seen this during our talks—and as far as I am concerned, the reason, perhaps, for which we do so is that we feel that we have, perhaps, a contribution to make in furthering the affairs of the world.

Now, the fact that the responsibilities that we have to shoulder at this particular time in history are particularly heavy at the same time means that our contribution will be a significant contribution.

Now, it is clear, however, that the affairs of mankind and the peace of the world do not depend solely on the action or the efforts of one country alone—however big that country may be—but will always depend on the combination, on the conjunction of the efforts of several. And I now know that it is quite clear that we will be able to work together.

Mr. President, when the French Fleet left these waters two centuries ago for the North American Continent, there were doubtless, at the time of departure, great festivities on board, and I can well imagine that my ancestor may well have offered a toast on that occasion which would probably have had something to do with the wishes that he would have expressed concerning the continent that they were about to discover and would have expressed their hopes and their expectations.

Now, this evening, today, the situation to some extent is the other way around in that it is we who are hosting you here in Martinique, but the French Martinique of two centuries ago and the French Martinique of today, Mr. President, are deeply proud of having here the visit today of the President of the United States. Our friend the President.

NOTE: President Ford spoke at 9:38 p.m. at the Swimming Pool Terrace of the Meridien Hotel, Martinique, French West Indies.

## MEETINGS WITH PRESIDENT VALERY GISCARD D'ESTAING OF FRANCE

*Communique Issued Following Meetings Between President Ford and President Giscard d'Estaing. December 16, 1974*

The President of the United States, Gerald R. Ford, and the President of the French Republic, Valery Giscard d'Estaing, met in Martinique December 14-16, 1974, to discuss current issues of mutual concern. They were joined in their discussions by the Secretary of State and Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs Henry A. Kissinger and Minister of Foreign Affairs Jean Sauvagnargues, and by Secretary of the Treasury William Simon and Minister of Finance Jean-Pierre Fourcade. The Ministers also held complementary side talks.

The meeting took place in an atmosphere of cordiality and mutual confidence. President Ford and President Giscard d'Estaing welcomed the opportunity to conduct detailed substantive discussions on the whole range of subjects of mutual concern. As traditional friends and allies, the two nations share common values and goals and the two Presidents expressed their determination to cooperate on this basis in efforts to solve common problems.

They reviewed the international situation in the economic, financial and monetary fields.

Volume 10—Number 51

The two Presidents agreed that the Governments of the United States and of the European Community, in the name of which the French President spoke on this subject, must adopt consistent economic policies in order to be effective in avoiding unemployment while fighting inflation. In particular, they agreed on the importance of avoiding measures of a protectionist nature. And they decided to take the initiative in calling additional intergovernmental meetings should they prove necessary for achievement of the desired consistency of basic economic policies among industrial nations.

In the light of the rapid pace of change in international financial positions in the world today, the Presidents were in full agreement on the desirability of maintaining the momentum of consideration of closer financial cooperation both within the International Monetary Fund and through supplementary measures. As one specific measure to strengthen the existing financial framework, the Presidents agreed that it would be appropriate for any Government which wished to do so to adopt current market prices as the basis of valuation for its gold holdings.

The two Presidents considered in depth the energy problem and its serious and disturbing effects on the world economy. They recognized the importance for the USA, the EEC and other industrialized nations of implementing policies for the conservation of energy, the development of existing and alternative sources of energy, and the setting up of new mechanisms of financial solidarity. They stressed the importance of solidarity among oil importing nations on these issues.

The two Presidents also exchanged views on the desirability of a dialogue between consumers and producers and in that connection discussed the proposal of the President of the French Republic of October 24 for a conference of oil exporting and importing countries. They agreed that it would be desirable to convene such a meeting at the earliest possible date. They regard it as important that all parties concerned should be better informed of their respective interests and concerns and that harmonious relations should be established among them in order to promote a healthy development of the world economy.

The two Presidents noted that their views on these matters are complementary and, in this context, they agreed that the following inter-related steps should be taken in sequence:

- They agreed that additional steps should be taken, within the framework of existing institutions and agreements to which they are a party, and in consultation with other interested consumers, to strengthen their cooperation. In particular, such cooperation should include programs of energy conservation, for the development of existing and alternative sources of energy and for financial solidarity.

- Based on substantial progress in the foregoing areas, the two Presidents agreed that it will be desirable to propose holding a preparatory meeting between consumers and producers to develop an agenda and procedures for a consumer/producer conference. The target date for such a preparatory meeting should be March 1975.

- The preparatory discussions will be followed by intensive consultations among consumer countries in order to prepare positions for the conference.

Volume 10—Número 51

1573

The two Presidents agreed that the actions enumerated above will be carried out in the most expeditious manner possible and in full awareness of the common interest in meeting this critical situation shared by the United States and France and all other countries involved.

President Ford and President Giscard d'Estaing reviewed current developments in East-West relations. They discussed their respective meetings with General Secretary Brezhnev, and Secretary Kissinger reported on his discussions with leaders of the People's Republic of China. They exchanged views on developments in East-West negotiations, including the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe. They expressed their conviction that progress in easing tensions was being made.

The two Presidents exchanged views on the present situation in the Middle East. They agreed on the importance of early progress toward a just and lasting peace in that area.

President Giscard d'Estaing described current efforts by France and other members of the European Community to further the process of European unity. President Ford reaffirmed the continuing support of the United States for efforts to achieve European unity.

The two Presidents discussed the situation in Indochina. They noted that progress in Laos toward reconciliation and reunification was encouraging.

The two Presidents agreed on the need for all parties to support fully the Paris Peace Agreements on Vietnam. Regarding Cambodia, they expressed the hope that the contending parties would enter into negotiations in the near future rather than continuing the military struggle. They expressed the hope that following Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam might also find their political way towards civil peace.

The two Presidents renewed the pledges of both Governments to continue close relations in the field of defense as members of the Atlantic Alliance. They agreed that the cooperation between France and NATO is a significant factor in the security of Europe.

They noted with satisfaction that the positive steps in negotiations on SALT taken during the Soviet-American meeting at Vladivostok have reduced the threat of a nuclear arms race. The two Presidents explored how, as exporters of nuclear materials and technology, their two countries could coordinate their efforts to assure improved safeguards of nuclear materials.

The President of France indicated that his Government was prepared to reach a financial settlement in connection with the relocation of American forces and bases committed to NATO from France to other countries in 1967. The French offer of $100 million in full settlement was formally accepted by President Ford.

The two Presidents concluded that the personal contact and discussion in this meeting had demonstrated accord on many questions and expressed their determination to maintain close contact for the purpose of broad cooperation in areas of common concern to the two countries.

NOTE: The text of the communique was released at Martinique, French West Indies.

Volume 10—Number 51

1574

# Meetings With President Valery Gissard d'Estaing of France

News Conference of Secretary of State

Henry A. Kissinger at the Conclusion of the
Meetings Between President Ford and
President Gissard d'Estaing.

December 16, 1974

MR. NESSEN. We have Dr. Kissinger now for his briefing, and as Mr. Beauchamps told you, this will be followed by the President of the Republic of France.

Dr. Kissinger's briefing is on the record, available for
filming and taping. There will be no filing until after the
briefing is completed.

Dr. Kissinger.

SECRETARY KISSINGER. Ladies and gentlemen, we have distributed the communique which is substantially self-explanatory. Let me make a few preliminary points.

First, as the President of the Republic said last night
in his toast, both sides approached these discussions with
the attitude not of who would get the maximum number
of concessions from the other or who would be the victor
in the negotiations, because we don't think of each other
as antagonists, but as allies.

We looked at the outstanding problems, especially in
the field of energy and economics, from the point of view
of what was in the mutual benefit, the benefit of Europe
and the United States, as well as the benefit of all the
interested nations around the world. And, therefore, with
respect to the energy issue, which was one of the prin-
cipal problems which was, of course, discussed, I think we
achieved the synthesis of the French and American posi-
tions which took account of the American conviction that
consumer cooperation was essential, and the French be-
lief—which, as a matter of fact, the United States has
always shared—that consumer cooperation must lead
rapidly to consumer/producer dialog.

I would like to add that in addition to the substance of
the communique the conversations were conducted in an
atmosphere of great cordiality and the relationship of con-
fidence that has grown up between the two Presidents will
help facilitate and guarantee the spirit of cooperation
which we believe is one of the important results of this
conference.

Having attended many similar meetings between
French and American leaders, I must say I found this
atmosphere the most positive and the one between the
two leaders, and one in which as far as the United States
is concerned—the French President will undoubtedly
speak for himself—we will continue in the exchanges that
will be necessary to implement the various aspects of the
communique as well as the cooperation that is foreseen
in the communique.

Now why don't I take your questions.

Q. Mr. Secrery, can you give us a rundown on the
sequence of events that are going to happen in these
conferences concerning the oil crisis? Which one takes
place first, and what happens after that?

SECRETARY KISSINGER. As the communique says, the
steps should be taken in sequence and the sequence is the
one described in the communique, that is to say, there will
first be an effort of some urgency to strengthen consumer
cooperation in the field of conservation, of developing
alternative sources of energy, and of setting up new
mechanisms for financial solidarity.

Based on progress among the consumers, this will then
lead to a preparatory meeting between consumers and
producers for which we set a target date for March 1975.
Of course, it depends on the progress the consumers make
among themselves, but the United States will cooperate
in bringing about the preparatory conferences and ob-
viously will not use delaying tactics.

I think there is good will on all sides. We can make
substantial progress among the consumers, and, given the
urgency of the situation, in fact, we must make substantial
progress among the consumers.

After the completion of the preparatory discussions,
we have foreseen intensive consultation among the con-
sumers to develop common positions and common atti-
tudes toward the Consumer/Producer Substantive Con-
ference. The preparatory meeting will deal with proce-
dure, agenda, participants, and will not deal with
substance.

This is the sequence that the two Presidents have
agreed upon, and again, I would like to say that the
United States has not considered its views as incompatible
with those of France. In fact, at the Washington Energy
Conference, we proposed that the consumer cooperation
should lead to consumer/producer dialog, and, therefore,
we welcome the French initiative, and I think we can
work cooperatively to achieve the common objective.

Q. Will France participate in this consumer effort to
strengthen solidarity?

SECRETARY KISSINGER. It says existing institutions and
agreements. There are a number of factors. France, of
course, is not a member of the IEA [International Energy
Agency] and we have not asked France to be a member
of the IEA. It is my impression that France will work in
parallel to the IEA in the same direction.

For example, we have had occasion to point out that
the French conservation program is going in the same
direction as that of the IEA and in some respects goes
beyond it.

The institutions or the mechanisms for financial soli-
darity we had proposed in my speech should be taken in
the Group of Ten in which France is, of course, a mem-
ber, and, therefore, there is no difficulty about French
participation in those.

With respect to alternative sources of energy, it may be
that they are initially discussed in the IEA, but there is

Volume 10—Number 51

1575

also a role there for European institutions, so we are not concerned with the legal structure.

It is our conviction that France will work parallel to our efforts and we will find the legal formula by which to implement.

Q. Mr. Secretary, doesn't that kind of informal arrangement give France the benefit of consumer organization that has already taken place without having any of the responsibilities, for example, in oil sharing?

SECRETARY KISSINGER. No, it is our view that we are concerned with the substance, and, therefore, how France participates under what legal form is not of decisive concern to us.

As I pointed out, the financial institutions, for example, are not being done in the IEA to begin with. The conservation measures, once they have been agreed upon, do not really require any international party to implement. They can be implemented on a national basis.

I have the impression that we should stop talking about Franco-American relations in terms of confrontation and who is taking advantage of whom, but rather in terms of practical cooperation in which the actions of the two parties will be more important than the legal form, and that is our attitude, and it is our impression that was the French attitude at this meeting.

Q. Mr. Secretary, could you please tell us what progress, if any, was made relative to your suggestion in Chicago of the $25 billion fund for the shoring up of those economies that need it in light of the oil shortage?

SECRETARY KISSINGER. We found the attitude of the French President very positive to this idea, and we have the impression that France will work with us in the Group of Ten to implement this idea.

Q. How do you account for the French change? All of a sudden you have peace, and it is lovely. What caused this after 10 years?

SECRETARY KISSINGER. I didn't say there has been a French change. I described the results of this conference, and I can only say that both Presidents seem to me to be convinced of the urgent problems facing their countries and facing the industrialized countries and, indeed, facing the whole world.

And it was a discussion that was not conducted in slogans but in terms of the issues, and when you confront the issues, I think certain conclusions are, more or less, inevitable.

I would also say that the manner in which both Presidents conducted the conversations, which was free of dogma on both sides—

Q. Free of what?

SECRETARY KISSINGER. D-o-g-m-a. It is a Latin word, not German—[laughter]—contributed to the result, but I don't want to claim any changes.

Q. Mr. Secretary, leaving aside the financial side in the Group of Ten, will the French participation in the con-

servation side be through the EEC [European Economic Community], that is to say, are you contemplating here that the EEC will become an elective member of the IEA?

SECRETARY KISSINGER. This is one possibility. It is not for the United States to prescribe how Europe should organize its energy policy. The United States would certainly have no objection and can see some advantages in a common energy policy on the part of Europe and this, in turn, of course, would permit the EEC to participate as a unit in the IEA.

This is essentially up to the Europeans.

Q. Do you think it will happen?

SECRETARY KISSINGER. Let me make a point. Obviously, the spirit of what has been agreed here in Martinique requires that France work in parallel on the same substance as the other principal consumers, and we believe that this can be done. This is one device for doing it, but we are prepared to find other consultative devices.

Q. Did you get any assurances from the President of France that they would be willing to do this at this meeting?

SECRETARY KISSINGER. That they would be prepared to have a common European energy policy?

Q. Or that EEC would join the IEA.

SECRETARY KISSINGER. We did not discuss the legal relationship of France to the IEA. We discussed the substantive relationship of the measures that needed to be taken, and as we pointed out, it is our view, and I think it is the common view, that certain substantive steps have to be taken in order to make the consumer/producer dialog useful. And the United States, obviously, will know whether these steps have been taken.

Q. Mr. Secretary, will the March conference be composed of nations outside the major oil producers and also major oil consumers?

SECRETARY KISSINGER. Let me make two points: The March date is a target date. It is not an absolutely fixed date, but we will work seriously to see whether it can be implemented. The original proposal was that it might be tripartite, that is, that some of the less developed consuming countries might also participate. The United States is not opposed to this in principle, or to put it positively, the United States is prepared for this but the exact composition of either the preparatory or the final meeting has not yet been settled. This is one of the issues that has to be settled.

Q. Mr. Secretary, can you give us further elaboration on the Mideast discussions? How much of the time was spent talking about the Middle East?

SECRETARY KISSINGER. I think, in the Mideast discussion, the French point of view has been publicly stated, and there was a full exchange of the respective points of view. No conclusions were reached or announced. This was mostly in the form of bringing about a fuller comprehension by each side of the views of the other.

Volume 10—Number 51

Q. Mr. Secretary, could you point two things out: What the gold agreement means also, what was our original request for compensation for the NATO bases?

SECRETARY KISSINGER. What the gold agreement means is this: that there has been a fixed price for the valuation of gold which does not reflect the market price and it means that each country is free to adopt current market prices as the basis for evaluation and, therefore, show on its books a value of gold reserves which corresponds more nearly to the market price of gold which is about 3½ to 4 times larger than the fixed price of gold and, therefore, reflects more accurately the capacity of the reserves of each country to pay for deficits.

I frankly do not remember what the original figures were. I know the French figure that they first offered us was substantially below $100 million, and I am certain the figure we asked for was substantially above, and this seemed to us to represent a fair compromise, but I don't remember what the figure was that we originally asked for.

Q. What of the apparent French suspicions that the United States is trying to dominate the policies of the industrialized world and dictating its terms?

SECRETARY KISSINGER. I don't want to comment about French suspicions that were not expressed at the meeting. At the meeting, we discussed how to deal with concrete issues, and we reached the results which I have described so that the suspicions that I occasionally read in the French press were not expressed by French officials, and I, therefore, don't feel the need to comment on that.

Q. On the gold question, does the agreement you have reached imply also the central banks are free now to buy and sell gold at the market price?

SECRETARY KISSINGER. I don't want to get into technical questions of gold purchases. What it means is that they can value their gold at the market price.

Q. It does mean that?

SECRETARY KISSINGER. It goes no further than that.

Q. Mr. Secretary, is it the American view that the United States will do this, or is it going to be a totally European proposition?

SECRETARY KISSINGER. The valuation?

Q. Yes.

SECRETARY KISSINGER. That is up to each country.

Q. I asked about the United States. Do you anticipate we will do it?

SECRETARY KISSINGER. I don't have the impression that we will do it in the near future.

Q. Mr. Secretary, is it the American view that a consumer/producer conference would have as a principal goal lower oil prices, and do the French share that view?

SECRETARY KISSINGER. I think everybody agrees that lower oil prices are highly desirable, and it is the Ameri-

can view that oil prices should be stabilized at a lower level.

I think we all agree that regardless of what happens to oil prices, the impact of the oil prices on the world economy and the means that are necessary to assure the stability of the economies of the industrialized nations, as well as a fair progress for the producer nations must be a subject of a consumer/producer dialog, but the preparatory meeting is designed precisely to define the agenda as well as the procedures of such a dialog, so it isn't possible to be conclusive about it at this moment.

Q. How is this going to be proposed to a country, like Japan, consumer/producer country conference?

SECRETARY KISSINGER. Well, as you know, we have been in the closest contact with the Government of Japan, and I had extensive conversations with the then Foreign Minister Kimura, which have been reaffirmed by the new Japanese Government. And, of course, the French Foreign Minister had been in Japan at about the same time that we were there.

So, it is my impression that what has been agreed upon here will have the support of the Government of Japan and reflect exactly the idea that the Government of Japan expressed to both of us. And it is also my view, based on conversations with the German Chancellor and with other major consuming nations in the NATO meeting in Brussels, that what was agreed to here will elicit a wide consensus.

Q. Dr. Kissinger, in elaboration on the Middle East question, does it appear that there was French acceptance of the United States idea of a step-by-step solution to the Arab-Israeli problem?

SECRETARY KISSINGER. I don't want to speak for France, particularly since the President of the Republic is waiting to appear here.

My impression is that there is no French disagreement with the step-by-step approach, but having a more Cartesian upbringing than we, France may perhaps feel it more necessary than we do to define the terminal point at the outset. I don't think there is any French disagreement with the step-by-step approach if it can be achieved.

Q. Mr. Secretary, it says in the communique that there has been accord on many questions. Could you point out the questions upon which there is disagreement?

SECRETARY KISSINGER. I am not leaving this meeting with a spirit that there has been substantial disagreement on any question. I think "many questions" refers to the fact that in a limited amount of time only particular issues could be discussed, and did not mean to imply that any issues that were discussed were left open to disagreement.

REPORTER. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.

NOTE: Press Secretary Ronald H. Nessen introduced Secretary Kissinger at 11:45 p.m. at the Meridien Hotel, Martinique, French West Indies.

Volume 10—Number 51

PRESS
DEPARTMENT OF STATE

Public Statement

January 2, 1975

NO. 3

For Release after 3 p.m.
Sunday, December 22, 1974

INTERVIEW OF THE HONORABLE HENRY A. KISSINGER
SECRETARY OF STATE
WITH NEWSWEEK

**QUESTION:** Looking back over the conduct of American foreign policy in 1974, what have been your greatest satisfactions and greatest disappointments?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** Strangely enough, the greatest satisfaction was that we managed the Presidential transition without a disaster. This was a rather heartbreaking period. I was extremely worried that while the central authority was in severe jeopardy, the transition might create basic weaknesses in the structure of our foreign policy. I considered our ability to continue an effective foreign policy the most satisfying thing. Of course, individual events were important, too: I got great satisfaction from the Syrian disengagement.

**QUESTION:** In that transition period, was there a hiatus in which you could not function very well?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** I would say from July to October was a period in which we could not act with decisiveness. Every negotiation was getting more and more difficult because it involved the question of whether we could, in fact, carry out what we were negotiating. Secondly, we were not in a position to press matters that might involve serious domestic disputes. And I think this affected to some extent the summit in Moscow in July. But it affected many other things in more intangible ways

**QUESTION:** How do you rank the SALT agreement in Vladivostok in the list of achievements for this past year?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** Very high, and of more permanent significance than perhaps anything else that was achieved. The various disengagement agreements in the Middle East were dramatic and important because they reversed a trend toward another outbreak of a war and may have set the stage for making some important progress. But I think in terms of permanent achievements, I would rank the outline for a second SALT agreement at or near the top. And I think it will be so viewed by history.

**QUESTION:** How do you account for all the criticism of SALT II?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** I think we have a difficult domestic situation right now. Many people remember, or think they remember, that foreign policy had certain domestic effects in '71 or '72. I don't agree with this. But I think it is in the back of some people's minds.

Secondly, there is a general atmosphere of disillusionment with government.

Thirdly, the liberal intellectual community, which used to lead American foreign policy, was alienated for a variety of reasons from the Johnson

For further information contact:

PR #3

-2-

Administration and then from the Nixon Administration, and therefore
from this Administration as well, at least at first.

Now, what in fact is the significance of this agreement? The nightmare
of the nuclear age is the fear of strategic arms based on the expectation
of what the other side is doing. One has to get one's priorities right.
The first objective must be to get that cycle of self-fulfilling prophecies
interrupted. That has now been substantially achieved. Once that is
built into the planning of both sides, I think the negotiations on reduc-
tions will be easier.

**QUESTION:** Do you see those negotiations for reductions taking place
before the ten-year period covered by the agreement is over?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** Yes, in fact, we have covered that in the aide-memoire. A number of people gained the impression that the reductions were to start only after 1985. The Vladivostok annoucement, in fact, said that negotiations should start no later than 1980 for reductions to take place after 1985. That has now been eliminated from the aide-memoire because it was never intended to preclude an agreement on reductions to take place well before 1985. So it is clear that negotiations can start as soon as possible and take effect as soon as there is an agreement.

**QUESTION:** Some people argue that the agreement sanctions MIRV levels that will lead to a first strike capability by both sides and actually encourage a new arms race.

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** The agreement has to be compared with what would
have happened in the absence of an agreement--not with a theoretical
model. All our intelligence estimates indicate that in the absence of
an agreement, Soviet MIRV levels would have been substantially higher
than they will be under the agreement, as well as Soviet total levels,
which in turn would have triggered another series of moves by us.
The so-called new construction programs are the minimum planned construc-
tion programs; they would certainly have been accelerated and expanded
if the Soviet Union had in fact produced at the level that our intelli-
gence estimates thought they could. And not only could, but would. I
am talking now about the middle intelligence estimate. Generally
three estimates are made--low, middle and high. Both of the ceilings
agreed in Vladivostok are below the low intelligence estimate, and
substantially below the medium intelligence estimate.

A myth is beginning to develop that in July we made a proposal of more
severe limitations on MIRV's, and that this, for some curious reason, was
abandoned between July and December. This simply is not true. The July
proposal first of all called for a five-year agreement. If you double
the number that we proposed for the five-year agreement, you would
have a higher number than the one we settled on for ten years.

**QUESTION:** The Soviets have issued a statement that they are not going to
make any guarantees about Jewish emigration from the Soviet Union. Does
this statement and its possible impact on the trade bill concern you?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** Yes, it concerns me. Certainly there is no one
in Washington who has not heard me warn about this for years. Without
saying anything, without making any claims for it, we managed to increase
Jewish emigration from 400 a year in 1968 to 35,000 before any of this
debate started. We had managed to intercede quietly in behalf of a list
of hardship cases, of which more than half were dealt with successfully.
We never claimed a success; we never took credit for it. We never
said this was a result of detente. We just encouraged it to happen.
We have warned constantly not to make this an issue of state-to-state
relations, because we were afraid it would lead to a formal confrontation
and defeat the objective of promoting emigration. Despite our deep

PR #3

[L.C]

-3-

misgivings, we acquiesced when statements were made by some which implied
that the Soviet Union had yielded to pressure, because we thought it was
the result that was important, and we wanted to avoid a domestic debate
that might have jeopardized the trade bill.

The issue of Jewish emigration is above all a human problem. There is
no legal agreement we can make with the Soviet Union that we can enforce.
Whether the Soviet Union permits emigration depends on the importance
they attach to their relationship with the United States and, therefore,
on the whole context of the East-West relationship.

If we can maintain a Soviet commitment to detente and if we can make clear
that this is related to the emigration question, existing understandings
will have a chance. But what we have had is, first, excessive claims.
And now the Export-Import Bank bill has been encumbered with amendments
that, to all practical purposes, virtually prevent loans of any sub-
stantial size to the Soviet Union.

Loans are more important to the Soviet Union than most-favored-nation
status, and in this respect the Soviets are worse off now, after three
years of detente and even after increased Jewish emigration, than they
were to begin with. We cannot simply keep saying that the Soviets must
pay something for detente, and then not provide anything from our side
to give them an interest in its continuance.

**QUESTION:** Do you see any signs that detente has led Moscow to play a more positive role in the Mideast?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** The Middle East is a very complicated issue for them and for us. I do not believe evidence supports the proposition that the Soviet Union produced the 1973 war. On the other hand, the Soviet Union has not been prepared to risk its relationship to some of the Arab states for the sake of Middle East tranquility. What this proves is that detente does not mean that the Soviet Union and we have become collaborators, but that we are partly rivals, partly ideologically incompatible, and partly edging toward cooperation. The Middle East has been an area where cooperation has been far from satisfactory.

**QUESTION:** Will detente help in the next round in the Mideast?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** Generally, yes, if all parties proceed with circumspection. Some of the participants in the Middle East conflict did not want an extremely active Soviet role. This was one inhibiting feature. The second is that a cooperative effort with the Soviet Union depends on the actual positions the Soviet Union takes. If the Soviet Union takes positions which are identical with one of the parties, then we are better off dealing with those parties directly.

**QUESTION:** What would be the necessary condition before the Palestine
Liberation Organization and Israel could sit down together and talk?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** It is impossible for the United States to recommend negotiation with the PLO until the PLO accepts the existence of Israel as a legitimate state. As long as the PLO proposals envisage, in one form or another, the destruction of Israel, we don't see much hope for negotiation with the PLO.

**QUESTION:** Do you share the concern of many people now who feel that both sides are hardening their positions?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** I have been through several Mideast negotiations, and they run a fever cycle. There is a great deal of excessive talk on both sides to prove that they have been tough, unyielding and didn't make any concessions. We are now in the relatively early phases of

PR #3

-4-

these exchanges. I am not pessimistic. On the contrary, I believe
another step is quite possible. Obviously, because of the Rabat meeting,
and the increasing complexity of the domestic situation of almost all
of the participants, negotiations are more difficult now than they were
a year ago. The stakes are also higher. But I believe that progress
is possible. We have to do it now by somewhat different methods than
we did last year. If I compare where we are now with where we were at
various stages during the Syrian negotiations, I think it looks far
more encouraging than it did then. I am in fact quite hopeful.

QUESTION: Are you going to de-emphasize "shuttle diplomacy"?

SECRETARY KISSINGER: There was a time for shuttle diplomacy, and there
is a time for quiet diplomacy. I cannot accept the principle that
whenever there is something to be settled, the Secretary of State must
go to the area and stake his personal prestige on the conduct of the
negotiations. I don't think that is a healthy situation. And, there-
fore, while I don't exclude that in a concluding phase, or in a critical
phase, I might go to the Middle East for three or four days, I will
not do so unless conditions are right and the stakes are important
enough.

QUESTION: Do you think there can be any further progress before Leonid Brezhnev goes to Egypt in January?

SECRETARY KISSINGER: It would be a grave mistake for the United States to gear its own policies to the travels of the General Secretary of the Soviet Party. We will negotiate as rapidly as we can, but we don't want to get into the business of imposing settlements or of getting ahead of the parties. The art of negotiations is to make sure that all of the parties feel that their essential interests are safeguarded, and that their dignity is respected. Our pace will be set, not by Brezhnev, but by how rapidly the parties move toward each other.

QUESTION: The military resupply of Israel, both during and after the 1973 war, seems to have stripped the American military establishment of some of its materiel. Does this suggest that the U. S. will have a difficult time resupplying Israel in any war of extended duration?

SECRETARY KISSINGER: I understand from Secretary Schlesinger that these stories about stripping the American military establishment are incorrect. And I understand that production in many of the essential categories is being stepped up. I don't think there is any physical incapacity to do what is necessary.

QUESTION: Some people say that it would be to Israel's advantage to find an excuse to launch a pre-emptive strike.

SECRETARY KISSINGER: Based on my talks with Israeli leaders, I do not believe that any responsible Israeli leader operates on this assumption. They know that if a war starts it may start events of incalculable consequences.

I think the responsible people in Israel realize that improved American relations with Arab countries are also in the interests of Israel, because they enable us to be a moderating influence. The Israeli leaders with whom I am dealing are genuinely interested in moving toward peace. It is a very complicated problem because their margin of survival is so much narrower than ours that it is hard for Americans to understand some Israeli concerns. But I do not believe that any Israeli leader would deliberately engage in such a reckless course.

QUESTION: Given the Arab oil weapon and how it affects Western support of Israel, can Israel expect to survive?

[L.C.]

PR #3

-5-

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** I think the survival of Israel is essential. The United States--and finally in the last analysis Europe--will not negotiate over the survival of Israel. This would be an act of such extraordinary cynicism that the world would be morally mortaged if it ever happened. But it won't happen.

**QUESTION:** In your list of pluses and minuses for the year, we have not touched on energy yet.

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** I think next to SALT, I would consider the most lasting achievement to be the energy policy that we developed. I think the Washington energy conference, the International Energy Agency, the Emergency Sharing Program and the measures which we are currently pursuing may be the beginning of a restructuring of relationships among the advanced industrial countries and eventually serve as a bridge to the producing countries.

**QUESTION:** What sorts of structure are you referring to?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** The structure that emerged in the immediate postwar period was essentially geared to military defense. Some of the difficulties that emerged in the '60s and early '70s, as a result of the growth of European unity and the emergence of Japan, were that the military organization and the political and economic organization had grown out of phase with each other. It has proved difficult to bring them back into phase by purely military arrangements. This is what I attempted to say in my "Year of Europe" speech, which was a little premature, but many of whose basic principles are now being accepted. Now the problem of how the advanced industrialized nations can give effect to the realities of interdependence is one of the most serious problems of our time--in the fields of energy, of food and of the whole nature of economic policies.

**QUESTION:** Is it American policy to organize the oil-consuming nations so that they can negotiate a reduction of oil prices with the producers?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** We would like to create the maximum incentives for a reduction of prices, and, failing that, the maximum capacity to withstand the high prices. The two things are related. If we have effective conservation measures, if we develop alternative sources of energy and if new sources of oil continue to be discovered, the balance between supply and demand must inevitably change. I have heard statements that the producers can always keep up with us by cutting production, but they will, I think, find this increasingly difficult to implement. If the industrialized nations implement measures of financial solidarity, we can reduce the effect of the balance-of-payment deficits. And when the emergency sharing program is in effect in a few months, the capacity of these countries to use embargoes for political effect will be reduced.

**QUESTION:** But while many of President Ford's advisers have been urging him to take stringent conservation measures, he has resisted so far.

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** I am convinced that the President will soon announce a program that will give effect to the principle I have outlined. I am confident that it will be a good program and that it will be adequate to our international responsibilities.

**QUESTION:** Are French President Valery Giscard d'Estaing and West German Chancellor Helmut Schmidt going to be more cooperative in these international structures? Are they really frightened of what is going on in Europe and the world?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** Both countries are convinced that without a greater interaction of economic policies, an economic disaster for everybody is probable. And everybody realizes that they cannot deal with the economic policies on a purely national basis.

PR #3

-6-

Secondly, there is a growing realization that the political demoralization of the industrialized countries must be arrested. This presupposed that governments can be seen to be coping with the problems that confront them. And that again will drive some more in the direction of interdependence. Right now it is really irrelevant to discuss what formula of consultation would be adequate because the necessities that are imposed on us by the energy crisis would produce their own formula.

**QUESTION:** Do you think the American public is prepared for the consequences of such a program?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** All I can say is that it is the absolute duty of leaders to tell the people what they believe is necessary. You can make your life easier by not putting tough choices to the public. But then when the inevitable catastrophe occurs, you have lost not only credibility, but legitimacy. So I don't think we really have any choice. I think the Administration will have to tell the public what is needed and I know that the President intends to do this. I think this is basically a healthy society, and I think there will be support.

**QUESTION:** If all else should fail, would the United States consider military intervention in the Middle East to secure oil at prices that we can afford?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** I don't think that would be a cause for military action.

**QUESTION:** You don't think that the financial bankruptcy of the West would be a casus belli?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** The financial bankruptcy of the West is avoidable by other means. We will find other solutions.

**QUESTION:** That doesn't answer the question, with all due respect.

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** What we would do if there were no other way of avoiding financial bankruptcy and the whole collapse of the Western structure, I cannot now speculate. But I am convinced that we won't reach that point.

**QUESTION:** What concrete steps might the U. S. take to try to induce the Third World countries to pursue a more realistic course in the UN?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** I think the Third World countries have to accept the fact that they too live in an interdependent world. They cannot both insist on cooperation from the advanced industrial countries and conduct constant warfare--economic or political--against the advanced industrial countries. The spirit of cooperation must be mutual. There will be disagreement, of course. That is unavoidable. But if you have a group of 77 nations that automatically vote as a group, regardless of the merits of the issue, then the United Nations becomes a test of strength, and the web of cooperation on which the development of all countries ultimately depends will be severely strained. In future sessions of the United Nations we will look more carefully into the degree of mutuality in the positions of the countries with which we are dealing.

**QUESTION:** Can you conceive of a situation in which the United States might decide to temporarily suspend itself from the United Nations to protest the tyranny of the majority?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** I can conceive that if an issue is too outrageously decided, that we would suspend our activities in relation to that issue. But it is hard to answer this question in the abstract.

-7-

PR #3

**QUESTION:** Our detente with China seems to have been stalled.

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** Well, this is the constant position of Newsweek magazine. But it is not our position. I believe that on the level of bilateral relations between the countries, we are essentially on course. I found that essentially confirmed by my last visit to the People's Republic of China. It is a relationship of practical necessity, in which two countries have made a decision to cooperate for limited objectives with each other. I don't accept the proposition that our policy is stalled.

**QUESTION:** Do you think within the next year we might move toward a normalization of relations with Cuba?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** We were prepared to accept a two-thirds vote of the Organization of American States at its recent meeting in Quito, and we were led to believe that this two-thirds vote had been assured. Suddenly we found ourselves in the position of being asked to produce votes for a resolution which we could not possibly sponsor, given the history of our involvement in the sanctions. There will be another occasion next year in a less structured meeting in Buenos Aires to discuss the Cuban issue, where the necessity of producing votes is less intense, and where one can then chart a course on a hemisphere basis more effectively. I think there will be some evolution during the next year.

**QUESTION:** How do you evaluate your own situation now at the end of the year?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** During the period of President Nixon's crisis, I may have been over-protected from Congressional criticism because many of the senators and congressmen instinctively were fearful of doing damage to our foreign policy and believed that they had to preserve one area of our national policy from partisan controversy. So it was inevitable that after that restraint was removed I would rejoin the human race and be exposed to the normal criticisms of Secretaries of State.

I have spent a great deal of time with Congress in the last few weeks, and I have the impression that there is a solid relationship. We worked out the Greek-Turkish aid problem, I think, in a cooperative spirit. I really feel passionately that if we don't maintain our foreign policy on a bipartisan basis, we will be in the deepest trouble. Of course, fundamental issues ought to be discussed, including fundamental foreign policy issues. But there are various areas in which there is or ought to be substantial agreement. And as far as I am concerned, I am going to go the absolute limit of maintaining it on a bipartisan basis.

**QUESTION:** Do you think the pendulum has swung too far from one direction, from talk of "Super K", to an overwillingness now to criticize you?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** There is no magic and there are no supermen in foreign policy. The difference between a good and a mediocre foreign policy is the accumulation of nuances. It is meticulousness; it is careful preparation. If a Secretary of State or anybody concerned with foreign policy goes out to hit a home run every time he goes up there, he is putting a burden on himself and a strain on the system.

**QUESTION:** You have been quoted as saying that Americans like the lone cowboy, walking into town with his six-guns blazing.

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** I think any society needs individuals that symbolize what it stands for. It is difficult to run countries without great figures.

PR #3

-8-

**QUESTION:** Have we great figures today?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** One of the problems of the modern age is that great figures are not so easy to come by.

**QUESTION:** Why?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** It may be that the process of reaching high office is so consuming that it leaves little occasion for reflection about what one does. Moreover, modern man doesn't like to stand alone. This is due largely to the impact of the media, in which everybody wants to check tomorrow morning's editorials.

**QUESTION:** What role do you think the media plays in your conduct of foreign policy?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** The negative aspect is that there is almost a daily pulling up of the trees to see whether the roots are still there. There is almost a daily necessity to explain each day's actions. And in the process there is a danger of losing the essence of a substantial foreign policy, which is the relationship of moves to each other and the over-all design. In order to conduct a foreign policy you must be prepared to act alone for some period. You cannot get universal approbation at every step of the way. And so the media have a tendency to produce a congenital insecurity on the part of the top people.

On the positive side, the need of public explanation forces an awareness that would not otherwise exist. The more sophisticated of the journalists often have a reservoir of knowledge and continuity that is better than that of many of the top officials. I could name individuals, who on arms control, on Vietnam negotiations, could spot subtleties that many of the officials could not see.

So I think that the interplay is on the whole useful. But as one looks ahead, there are several dangers. There is a danger of a Caesaristic democracy in which the media are manipulated by the government. There is a danger of the media trying to substitute themselves for the government. And you know yourself that there are fads; that sometimes there is excessive praise, and then it swings back to excessive criticism.

**QUESTION:** You are about to begin your seventh year in Washington. Is there a seven-year itch? Are you thinking of turning to something else?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** I would like to think that the best time to leave is when you are not under pressure. I have been here long enough now so I don't have to continue being here to prove something to myself.

On the other hand, I am also engaged in a number of things from which it would be either difficult to dissociate or painful to dissociate. I would like to think that I will know when to get out. But very few people have mastered this. And most people are carried out instead of walking out. I have no itch to leave. But I also have no compulsion to stay.

+++ ++ +

Let me turn to the Middle East

The state of our Union is more closely tied than ever before to the prospects for peace in that part of the world. The successful outcome of settlement efforts in the Middle East will test our conscience and our strength, but it is critical to the future course of the industrial and underdeveloped world.

Today,

- It is imperative to achieve a just and durable settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict, and

- the opportunity exists for just such a settlement.

Our efforts have begun well. American leadership has been firm. The disengagement agreements between Israel and her Arab neighbors were realistic and mutually beneficial first steps which set in motion a promising and crucial process of settlement.

We must and will continue our efforts on this course with resolution and wisdom to attain a peace based on justice. This is as important to our national security as it is to the security of both the Arab States and Israel, and is essential in establishing a durable and stable future for this and coming generations in the area.

The United States cannot impose the terms of a settlement, but all concerned about the Middle East should understand that the US is committed

-2-

to the survival of the State of Israel and to the search for a permanent
peace in which the legitimate interests of all concerned, including the
Palestinians, will be met. It will continue to deepen its friendships --
old, new and rediscovered -- in the Arab World, and to promote mutual
understanding through tested mechanisms and ones, such as the joint
commissions, newly created to achieve that end.

This Copy For

NEWS CONFERENCE

#38

AT THE WHITE HOUSE

WITH JACK HUSHEN

AT 6:53 P.M. EDT

SEPTEMBER 26, 1974

THURSDAY

MR. HUSHEN: On the meeting with President Leone, that was, as you know, the second meeting, which lasted about 50 minutes and was necessary to complete the discussions begun yesterday and to approve the joint statement, which you now have, pertaining to the substance of their discussions.

President Leone, as you may know, goes to New York tomorrow to address the U.N. General Assembly and to attend meetings there, and he plans to return to Italy on September 29.

Following the meeting with President Leone, the President met for approximately 45 minutes with the West German Foreign Minister, Hans-Dietrich Genscher, who I am sure you know is in the United States for the current session of the U.N. General Assembly.

During the meeting, the President and the Foreign Minister had a very positive, broad-ranging and useful exchange of views on U.S.-European relations and on international issues, including Cyprus, the Middle East and the international energy and financial situation.

The President reaffirmed his commitment to working closely and in partnership with the leaders of Western Europe on the major issues of current mutual interest and importance.

The President and the Foreign Minister also discussed East-West issues, including the Conference on Security and Cooperation, which is going on in Geneva, and the status of force reduction talks now going on in Vienna.

That is about all I can give you on that meeting.

THE PRESS: Thank you.

END (AT 7:56 P.M. EDT)

#38

1198

United States Permanent
Representative on the
NATO Council

Announcement of Intention To Nominate
David K. E. Bruce. September 26, 1974

The President announced today his intention to nom-
inate David K. E. Bruce of the District of Columbia as
United States Permanent Representative on the Council
of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization with the rank
of Ambassador. Ambassador Bruce has served since
May 1, 1973, as the Chief of the United States Liaison
Office to the People's Republic of China.

In 1970, he was appointed as head of the United
States delegation to the Paris Conference on Vietnam.

From 1961 to 1969, he was Ambassador to Great Britain after having served as Ambassador to the Federal Republic of Germany. He has also served as Under Secretary of State, as United States Representative to the European Coal and Steel Community, and as Assistant Secretary of Commerce. In 1949, he became Ambassador to France, serving until 1952.

He was born on February 12, 1898, in Baltimore, Md., and received his B.A. degree from Princeton University in 1919. He was awarded his J.D. degree from the University of Maryland in 1921. He was admitted to the Maryland Bar and practiced in Baltimore until 1925. From 1925 to 1945, he was in the United States Foreign Service, business, farming, and the Office of Strategic Services.

He is married to the former Evangeline Bell, and they
have three children.

VISIT OF PRESIDENT GIOVANNI LEONE
OF ITALY

U.S.-Italian Joint Statement Issued at the Conclusion of the Italian President's Visit. September 26, 1974

President Giovanni Leone of Italy made a State visit to the United
States of America September 25-29, 1974, at the invitation of President
Gerald R. Ford of the United States of America. Accompanying the
President were Mrs. Leone, Minister of Foreign Affairs Aldo Moro, and
other Italian officials.

During the visit, President Leone and President Ford held extensive
and cordial discussions on a wide variety of international questions in
which Minister of Foreign Affairs Aldo Moro and Secretary of State
and Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs Henry A.
Kissinger also participated. Minister Moro and Secretary Kissinger also
held detailed talks on current issues of mutual interest.

President Ford and President Leone expressed their mutual satisfac-
tion with the results of the talks. It was agreed that frequent consultations
in the spirit of the Atlantic Declaration signed in Brussels on June 26 were
a most desirable means of achieving better understanding of problems
of common interest and possible solutions. They were in full agreement
that such consultations should in no way prejudice other existing obliga-
tions. As a result of their exchanges of views, the two Presidents noted
the broad agreement between them with respect to their policies in
numerous areas:

1. They noted that their policies will continue to be guided by their desire for the maintenance of peace, adherence to the principles of the United Nations Charter, and promotion of a stable structure of peace which reflects the diverse nature and needs of the nations of the world. In this connection, both sides emphasized their commitment to overcoming the sources of tension and conflict which are divisive factors in the international community.

Volume 10—Number 39

1199

2. There was full agreement on the importance of the North Atlantic Alliance as an instrument which has guaranteed the security of its members, strengthened international stability, enhanced confidence among peoples, and thus has permitted them growing and fertile contacts with all the peoples of the world and provided the indispensable basis for the process of détente.

3. They reemphasized in this connection the importance they attach to the Atlantic Declaration and their determination to seek the fulfillment of the principles set forth in the Declaration in concert with their other NATO allies. President Ford underlined the importance the United States attaches to Italy's continuing valuable contributions to the Alliance.

4. They recognized the importance attached by the Nine members of the European Community to their efforts toward European union, and welcomed the reciprocal undertaking by the members of the Community and the United States to strengthen their relations on the basis of enhanced consultations within the broad framework of Atlantic cooperation. President Ford welcomed particularly the constructive role played by Italy in strengthening this cooperation.

5. They noted their determination that current negotiations in furtherance of détente on matters related to security and cooperation in Europe must result in enhanced stability in the relationships among all nations concerned. They also emphasized their continuing commitment to achieving balanced and effective international arms control agreements resulting in undiminished security for all nations.

6. They noted their concern with developments in the Mediterranean Basin and pledged their efforts to achieve equitable solutions. The United States noted in this connection that it looks to Italy, as a Mediterranean nation which has made a signal contribution to world civilization, to play a leading role in the common pursuit of lasting peace in that area.

7. They expressed their conviction that only international cooperative efforts can overcome the trade and financial problems confronting the nations of the world. They recognized that the solutions to national problems have their impact on the international community as a whole. While individual nations have primary responsibility for their own problems, the two Presidents recognize that the solutions required in a modern and complex interdependent world may go far beyond individual capabilities and require cooperation among members of the international community. In this regard, the United States has taken careful note of Italy's major efforts to meet its own domestic economic and financial problems and the responsiveness of the international community to these efforts. President Ford stated that the United States is prepared to play an appropriate, constructive and responsible role in a return to economic equilibrium in Italy.

8. They recognized the great importance of industrial, technical, and cultural cooperation among all nations and the imperative need for the equitable distribution of world resources among all nations. They agreed to facilitate initiatives in this regard in appropriate forums.

9. Finally, the two Presidents particularly noted the extraordinarily broad human ties between Italy and the United States of America, and the shared values and goals which bind together the Italian and American peoples.

10. President Leone extended to President Ford an invitation to visit Italy in the near future. President Ford accepted with pleasure.

Volume 10—Number 39

PRESS
DEPARTMENT OF STATE

October 1, 1974

No. 388

EXCHANGE OF TOASTS
BETWEEN
THE HONORABLE HENRY A. KISSINGER
SECRETARY OF STATE
AND HIS EXCELLENCY AMBASSADOR FU-AD NAFFA'
CHAIRMAN OF THE COUNCIL OF THE LEAGUE OF ARAB STATES
AT A DINNER FOR THE MEMBERS OF THE LEAGUE OF ARAB STATES
U.S. MISSION TO THE UNITED NATIONS
NEW YORK

SEPTEMBER 30, 1974

Secretary Kissinger

Mr. Secretary General, Excellencies, Friends:

I first of all want to make clear that this is not the beginning of a confrontation about oil prices [laughter and applause] -- especially as long as you all outnumber me here. [Laughter]

I tried — I've seen so many of you over the past year so many times; in fact, I've seen more Arab leaders than any other part of the world — that I tried to promote my participation at the Arab Summit later this month. [Laughter]

I must say the Foreign Minister of Morocco, who is very elegant and very subtle, did not speak English when the subject was raised. [Laughter and applause] So maybe next year.

But we met here — many of us — about this time last year, and I had the impression that one or two of you had some slight reservations about my appointment as Secretary of State. And it is true, leaving aside any particular individuals, that for a period of many years the situation in the Middle East had become frozen.

I spoke to my friend Omar two weeks before the October War began, and I told him that we would try to make a major diplomatic effort in order to promote peace in the Middle East. And then there was the war, and since then we have had an opportunity to talk together about many problems.

I think great changes have occurred in the Middle East. I think the peoples in the Middle East have realized that they should make a very serious effort to move towards peace which is based on the recognition of the rights of all peoples in the area. And the United States has understood that a conditional stalemate in the Middle East creates a constant source of tensions, and the economic consequences that flowed from this war have taught the whole world what was probably not intended — for instance, that our global economy is interdependent in a way that few of us had realized and that producers and consumers — consumers

R #388

-2-

among you gentlemen — depend on an understanding of each other's necessi-
ties that has made the world a global community.

We have had the opportunity to meet many of you and to understand the aspirations for peace that exist in the area, and a beginning has been made towards a just and lasting peace. We recognize that it is only beginning. And in my speech to the General Assembly, I expressed the determination of the United States to use all its influence to continue the process that was started on a basis that takes care of the aspirations of all of the countries in the area and that encompasses the concerns of the parties.

I will be going to the Middle East next week to see whether this negotiating process can be started, and we will spare no effort. With your understanding, your support, I am confident that we will make progress.

That, at any rate, is what we have dedicated ourselves to.

We also have started, as you all know, a discussion on the nature of the interdependence of the global economy. This is not the place to go into it. And my friend Omar has already told me that he has prepared a crushing reply to be made public very soon. [Laughter]

I want to say that as far as the United States is concerned, we are not going to enter these discussions in a spirit of confrontation. It is our profound conviction that what we are trying to convey to all of our friends is that it is impossible to achieve unilateral benefit, and that it's peculiarly a situation where what is in the common benefit is also for the individual gain of everybody.

How that will be worked out in time depends on many discussions, but on our side we approach these discussions in a spirit of goodwill and with the certainty that a reasonable solution that is just to all can be found.

I want to take this opportunity on a personal basis to express my gratitude, the gratitude of the United States Government, to all of you who have welcomed my colleagues and me over the past year, on our many travels, with the proverbial Arab hospitality.

We are engaged in a very difficult process — all of us together — and I have appreciated our understanding of your friendship. And I am confident that the problems before us will be solved in a manner that all of us in this room can be proud to have worked together.

In this spirit I'd like to propose a toast to the friendship between the Arab peoples and the people of the United States.

[Applause]

Ambassador Naffa'

Mr. Secretary of State:

I will thank you first because you didn't want to make confrontation with Arabs here about the oil problem, because — as you said — it's not here that we can discuss it; and, on the other hand, it would have been a little difficult for me, with my weak English, to discuss this problem. [Laughter and applause]

PR #388

-3-

Anyway, we conceive interdependence of the nations and the economies
as a global community, but we conceive that in the global community right
and justice will have their word to say and to be applied.

About your participation at the conference — the Summit Conference —
we cannot decide it here too. [Laughter] You have to apply [laughter and
applause] and to see who will sponsor your application. [Laughter] Maybe
I will.

Mr. Secretary of State, I would like to express to you on my behalf
and on that of my colleagues, the Foreign Ministers of the other Arab
states, our thanks and appreciation for your gesture of inviting us this
evening. We find this gesture an expression of your desire to establish
friendly relations with us on a personal level, to continue the dialogue,
and to strengthen the relations between the United States and our countries.

I would like to assure you that we welcome this gesture very much,
for we all are open to dialogue, desirous to strengthen the good relations
between us and to exchange views in honesty and frankness. Our hope is
to be able to develop friendly relations with your country on the basis
of understanding and cooperation in an atmosphere of mutual confidence,
and that these relations would serve real peace which is founded on the
respect of the principle of right and justice.

I am confident that I am expressing the opinion of all my colleagues
when I praise the great efforts which you have made during the past few
months and the positive results which you have been able to achieve. I
am also expressing their belief when I say that the present circumstances
require intensification of these efforts, for the stage which we have
reached today in cooperation with you has been necessary and useful.

However, it is not sufficient to achieve peace. It is only a preli-
minary stage which has opened the door, provided that the intentions
are sincere, to implement the basic requirements of achieving peace.

You know these requirements very well, Mr. Secretary of State, and
you also undoubtedly know that the real chance for peace depends to a
great extent on the position which the United States takes in the next
few months because of the great influence which she enjoys and the big
potentials she has in her possession.

For this reason, I can say that our expectations from you are as
great as the responsibilities which you share.

I raise my glass to wish you health and prosperity.

[Applause]

* * * * * * * * *

1218

SEC. 2. Except to the extent another basis is provided in the second sentence of section 3 of this Order, all rules and regulations issued by the Secretary of Commerce, published in title 15, chapter III, subchapter B, of the Code of Federal Regulations, parts 368 to 399 inclusive, and all orders, regulations, licenses and other forms of administrative action issued or taken pursuant thereto, shall until amended or revoked by the Secretary of Commerce, remain in full force and effect, the same as if issued or taken pursuant to this Order, except that the maximum fine which may be imposed under part 387.1(a)(1) shall not exceed $10,000 and that the civil penalty provided for under part 387.1(b)(3) will not be applicable to any violation of the regulations under this Order.

SEC. 3. The delegations of authority in this Order shall not affect the authority of any agency or official pursuant to any other delegation of Presidential authority, presently in effect or hereafter made, under section 5(b) of the act of October 6, 1917, as amended. Those regulations issued under the Export Control Act of 1949, as amended, to implement foreign policy set forth in Executive Orders Nos. 11322 of January 5, 1967 and 11419 of July 29, 1968, shall until amended or revoked by the Secretary of Commerce continue to apply as regulations issued under such orders.

GERALD R. FORD

The White House,
September 30, 1974.

[Filed with the Office of the Federal Register, 11:59 a.m., October 1, 1974]

# U.S. Military Assistance to Turkey

Statement by the President. October 1, 1974

Last night, the Eagleton amendment to the continuing resolution authority was passed by the Senate. Today, the continuing resolution itself will be brought to a Senate vote.

It is my conviction that approval of the continuing resolution, containing the Eagleton amendment or similar language, would destroy any hope for the success of the initiatives the United States has already taken or may take in the future to contribute to a just settlement of the Cyprus dispute. This view is shared by Secretary of State Kissinger, who is now in New York where he is making a major effort in his talks with Greek and Turkish representatives to bring about progress.

If the Eagleton amendment or similar language is adopted by the Congress, the United States will have lost its negotiating flexibility and influence. It thus hurts the very countries and objectives it purports to help.

It is my intention, therefore, to withhold my consent to any continuing resolution which reaches my desk containing language such as that found in the Eagleton amendment. I can, however, accept, and indeed endorse, the language relating to military assistance to Turkey contained in the continuing resolution as reported to the full Senate by the Senate Appropriations Committee.

I deeply appreciate the constructive efforts of the Democratic and Republican leadership in both the Senate and House of Representatives in their support for an amendment which would assist the diplomatic efforts of Secretary Kissinger in seeking an equitable solution to the Cyprus question. I hope a majority of the Senate will respond to this bipartisan leadership effort.

# Defense Production Act Amendments of 1974

Statement by the President on Signing the Bill Into Law. October 1, 1974

I have signed S. 3270, the Defense Production Act Amendments of 1974.

The Defense Production Act was first passed in 1950 at the beginning of the Korean war, as a means of expanding the Nation's industrial capacity and enabling the Federal Government to produce and allocate critical materials in times of national emergency and for national security and other purposes. Since 1950, the act has provided ongoing authorization for the Government to assure that we have the productive capacity that would be needed for wartime mobilization.

The legislation I have signed extends the Defense Production Act until June 30, 1975. It also makes two significant changes in that act.

First, S. 3270 completely revises the financing mechanisms for loan and purchase activities under the act. All such activities will no longer be funded through Treasury borrowing but through regular, more straightforward appropriations process.

Secondly, S. 3270 creates a National Commission on Supplies and Shortages. This Commission will study our supply picture and make recommendations on those institutional adjustments which may be needed to ensure that we can respond quickly and effectively to potential resources and commodity shortages.

For the last 6 months, a special Administration task force has been at work identifying and assessing potential threats to our imports of critical, nonfuel raw materials. The findings of this task force are completed, and

Volume 10—Number 40

This Copy For

NEWS CONFERENCE

#45

AT THE WHITE HOUSE

WITH RON NESSEN

AT 12:15 P.M. EDT

OCTOBER 7, 1974

MONDAY

MR. NESSEN: I notice that some people told the President yesterday that his new dog was friendlier toward reporters than his Press Secretary is, so I am practicing and I hope to learn to wag my tail and probably come around and lick your faces every now and then. (Laughter)

Seriously, you have seen the President's schedule for yesterday and today. After attending services at St. John's, the President spent most of the rest of the day continuing to work on the speech he will deliver to the Joint Session of Congress at 4:00 on Tuesday. The way I had hoped to be able to do this was to go through the announcements and then come back and tell you a little about the meeting yesterday, if that is all right.

He met with a number of staff members who were here yesterday including Rumseld, Hartmann, Seidman, Simon, Buchen, Marsh, Kissinger, Skowcroft, and I also talked to him myself.

Q Is that the peeking order?

MR. NESSEN: No, no particular order. No, that is not the peeking order.

I will give you a rundown on the meeting yesterday when I get through all the rest of this.

This morning the President was in his office at 7:30. He met with members of the staff this morning too, and those are Seidman, Rumsfeld, Kissinger, Skowcroft, Hartmann and myself.

The President this morning received a report from the two senior AID officials whom he sent to Honduras to survey the damage from Hurricane Fifi and its aftermath.

MORE

#45

[Lc]

- 7 -

#45-10/7

MR. NESSEN: My understanding is that the economic people do not want any filing before four o'clock. I think it is fairly standard on a major economic speech to try to keep the proposals in the speech as closely held as possible until the stock market closes.

Q You are saying, then, that we won't even be able to dictate advance copy to our desks until four o'clock?

MR. NESSEN: That is what they would like, and that is the way we will have to do it.

Q Will you have speeches sent to the Capitol? Will they be sent up there?

MR. NESSEN: My understanding is nobody is going to know what is in the speech before four o'clock.

Q Without being presumptious, could I suggest it would be very helpful tomorrow morning if the regular briefing started at 11:30?

MR. NESSEN: I assume there won't be many economic questions left by tomorrow morning.

Q But there won't be any time left for the larger --

MR. NESSEN: No, I know, and I have to get ready myself so I definitely will do that.

Q Because of the phone situation, would it be possible for those of us at the White House to come back here after the briefing and hold everything until four o'clock?

MR. NESSEN: I think what we are going to do is to let you out of Room 450 in time for you to get from there to here to your phones by four o'clock. We did discuss that this morning, and that seems to be the arrangement.

Q How long is the speech going to run?

MR. NESSEN: The speech is not completed yet. Somebody remarked yesterday -- I was going to tell you about this when I told you about the meeting yesterday -- that the way it is now it is about two hours long. But obviously, it is going to be cut down, but it is going to be longer rather than shorter.

MORE

#45

This Copy For

NEWS CONFERENCE

#46

AT THE WHITE HOUSE

WITH RON NESSEN

AT 11:30 A.M. EDT

OCTOBER 8, 1974

TUESDAY

MR. NESSEN: I have a statement by the
President.

Q Will it be distributed afterward?

MR. NESSEN: Yes, sir.

Q How soon?

MR. NESSEN: Momentarily.

"Yesterday the House of Representatives, once
again acting against the almost unanimous advice of
its leadership, amended the continuing resolution
granting funds for our foreign aid programs. The
amendment requires an immediate cessation of all
U.S. military assistance to Turkey, and is, in my
view a misguided and extremely harmful measure.

"Instead of encouraging the parties involved
in the Cyprus dispute to return to the negotiating
table, this amendment, if passed by the Senate, will mean
the indefinite postponement of meaningful negotiations.
Instead of strengthening America's ability to persuade
the parties to resolve the dispute, it will lessen our
influence on all the parties concerned. And it will
imperil our relationships with our Turkish friends and
weaken us in the crucial Eastern Mediterranean.

"But most tragic of all, a cut-off of arms
to Turkey will not help Greece or the Greek Cypriot
people who have suffered so much over the course of the
last several months. We recognize that we are far from
a settlement consistent with Greece's honor and dignity.
We are prepared to exert our efforts in that direction.
But reckless acts that prevent progress toward a Cyprus
settlement harm Greeks, for it is the Greek government
and the Greek Cypriots who have the most to gain from a
compromise settlement. And it is they who have the most
to lose from continued deadlock.

MORE

#46

- 2 -

#46-10/8

"Thus I call upon the Senate to accept the original conference report language on Turkish arms aid and to return the bill to the House of Representatives once again. And I ask the House of Representatives to reconsider its hasty act and, working with the Senate, pass a bill that will best serve the interests of peace."

Q Does he say in there that he is going to veto it again? We see that threat. Will he --

Q We can't hear that.

MR. NESSEN: The question was, the President does not say anywhere in his statement that he would veto the bill. Well, there is nothing to veto at the moment. He was urging Congress to send him a bill which he could sign.

Q He still could not sign the House version of the bill?

MR. NESSEN: As passed last night?

Q Yes, sir.

MR. NESSEN: Right.

Q Was the President on the phone this morning with House leaders on this?

MR. NESSEN: I don't know what his schedule of phone calls was for this morning.

We posted the schedule for today.

Q Can I go back? Are you saying in effect unless the bill is changed to comply with this request, he will veto the bill?

MR. NESSEN: I want to emphasize that the thrust of the statement is toward the end, urging Congress to send him a bill, and the House of Representatives to reconsider its action and to pass a bill that will best serve the interests of peace.

Q The question was, I think, could he sign the bill as passed last night, and I say --

MR. NESSEN: I said no.

MORE

#46

- 3 -

#46-10/8

Q So then you are saying he will veto the bill?

MR. NESSEN: If it were to come up here in this form, which he hopes it won't, he will veto it.

Q Ron, does the President have any reason to believe that the Senate will reverse the House action, in view that the Eagleton amendment started in the Senate?

MR. NESSEN: Well, he is urging them to send a bill that he can accept.

Q Ron, on the other side of that coin, doesn't the President think it is harmful and perhaps set a bad precedent for a country that abrogates, in effect, its U.S. military aid agreements, encouraging perhaps other countries to do the same thing whenever they feel like it, to use U.S. arms in furtherance of regional warfare?

MR. NESSEN: Jerry, I think the President, both in this statement and in several recent statements, and in Secretary Kissinger's news conference yesterday, have addressed the question of why they feel that this is not a proper bill.

I really do not think I could add anything to what the President said and Secretary Kissinger said along those lines you raised.

Q Ron, if I could go back to Peter's question for a moment, is there anything that has happened in any conversation or consultation that gives him, the President, reason to think that there could be a change in action?

MR. NESSEN: Well, at one point in this process it looked like an acceptable bill had been agreed to, if I remember the process correctly. This was a somewhat sudden and unexpected action by the House last night.

Q Has he had some new consultation --

MR. NESSEN: Today?

Q -- with Rhodes or Albert or anybody in the Senate that would make him think that they are going to change their action?

MR. NESSEN: Well, I don't know that he has had any conversations with Albert or Rhodes.

MORE

#46

- 4 -

#46-10/8

Q Ron, would the President like to see the Military Assistant Act changed in view of the fact that he had run into this difficulty in regard to the Cyprus situation?

MR. NESSEN: Changed in what sense?

Q To have this stipulation removed with regard to use of American military aid in these regional conflicts. I guess what I am getting at is why doesn't he address the subject head on and ask that the Military Assistance Act be changed?

MR. NESSEN: I think the problem at the moment is to get a continuing resolution that is acceptable.

Q Ron, if I remember correctly, that amendment did give the President some flexibility, provided substantial progress was made in these negotiations. Am I wrong on that?

MR. NESSEN: As I say, I have not kept track that closely on the entire legislative process, but I do remember at one point there was an amendment with roughly that language in it, about the good faith effort, I think.

Q No, that good faith effort was changed to substantial progress, and that was what, as I understand it, was passed last night. Is that what the President was referring to last night or is this something else that requires immediate cessation of aid in the absence of substantial progress?

MR. NESSEN: My understanding is that the version we are talking about here that he finds unacceptable was considerably more restrictive than anything that has been talked about before because it contained a combination of all the most restrictive amendments that had been talked of and voted on in various forms before.

Q Ron, he talks about immediate cessation of all military aid to Turkey. I thought that the House amendment said that you have to stop aid to Turkey unless there is substantial progress and left it to the President to decide whether substantial progress was made.

MR. NESSEN: Peter, why don't you check the language of the House bill. I am not totally -- what was done last night?

MORE

#46

- 5 -

#46-10/8

Q I want to know what the President is referring to.

MR. NESSEN: He is referring to the version that the --

Q That the House passed last night?

Q Even though this version is considered somewhat less restrictive than the Eagleton amendment?

MR. NESSEN: I am not sure it is, Jim. It is, as I say, a combination of several restrictive amendments. As I understand it, there were two Rosenthal amendments, both restrictive, and this version has both of them in there.

Q Ron, without pressing the point, I have to go back to my original question. If the President is truly concerned about what will best serve the interests of peace -- and maybe you can take this question if you can't answer it now -- is he not concerned that continued abrogation of agreements under the U.S. Military Assistance Act could serve as a very grave threat to the interest of peace as long as governments continue to misuse American arms?

MR. NESSEN: As I understand it, Dr. Kissinger has addressed the question several times of whether there was indeed abrogation and a misuse. As I understand it, that ruling has never been made by the State Department so your question is really based on a false premise, Jerry.

Q Congress does not think so.

MR. NESSEN: We posted the schedule for today.

Yesterday afternoon before departing for Burlington and his appearance at the dinner in honor of Senator Aiken, the President met with Don Rumsfeld, Jack Marsh, and Phil Buchen, in addition to his meeting with the National Security Council and his meeting with Archbishop Iakovos.

On the plane he had further meetings with Don Rumsfeld and myself.

MORE

#46-10/8

1239

CARL H. PFORZHEIMER, Jr., of Purchase, N.Y., senior partner of Carl Pforzheimer and Co. This is a reappointment.

WILSON C. RILES, of Sacramento, Calif., superintendent of public instruction for the State of California. This is a reappointment.

The National Council on Educational Research was established by the Education Amendments of 1972 (Public Law 92-318), which also established the National

Institute of Education in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. The purpose of the Council is to establish policies for the Institute and advise the Assistant Secretary for Education and the Director of the NIE on development of the Institute's programs. The Council is to report annually to the President and the Congress.

## THE ECONOMY

*The President's Address Delivered Before a Joint Session of the Congress.*
*October 8, 1974*

Mr. Speaker, Mr. President, distinguished guests, my very dear friends:

In his first inaugural address, President Franklin D. Roosevelt said, and I quote: "The people of the United States have not failed . . . They want direct, vigorous action, and they have asked for discipline and direction under our leadership."

Today, though our economic difficulties do not approach the emergency of 1933, the message from the American people is exactly the same. I trust that you are getting the very same message that I am receiving: Our constituents want leadership, our constituents want action.

All of us have heard much talk on this very floor about Congress recovering its rightful share of national leadership. I now intend to offer you that chance.

The 75d Congress responded to FDR's appeal in 5 days. I am deeply grateful for the cooperation of the 93d Congress and the Conference on Inflation, which ended 10 days ago.

Mr. Speaker, many—but not all—of your recommendations on behalf of your party's caucus are reflected in some of my proposals here today. The distinguished Majority Leader of the Senate offered a nine-point program. I seriously studied all of them and adopted some of his suggestions.

I might add I have also listened very hard to many of our former colleagues in both bodies and of both the majority and the minority, and have been both persuaded and dissuaded. But in the end, I had to make the decision, I had to decide, as each of you do when the rollcall is called.

I will not take your time today with the discussion of the origins of inflation and its bad effect on the United States, but I do know where we want to be in 1976—on the 200th birthday of a United States of America that has not lost its way, nor its will, nor its sense of national purpose.

During the meetings on inflation, I listened carefully to many valuable suggestions. Since the summit, I have evaluated literally hundreds of ideas, day and night.

My conclusions are very simply stated. There is only one point on which all advisers have agreed: We must whip inflation right now.

None of the remedies proposed, great or small, compulsory or voluntary, stands a chance unless they are combined in a considered package, in a concerted effort, in a grand design.

I have reviewed the past and the present efforts of our Federal Government to help the economy. They are simply not good enough, nor

1249

PRESIDENTIAL DOCUMENTS: GERALD R. FORD, 1975

sufficiently broad, nor do they pack the punch that will turn America's
economy on.

A stable American economy cannot be sustained if the world's econ-
omy is in chaos. International cooperation is absolutely essential and
vital. But while we seek agreements with other nations, let us put our
own economic house in order.

Today, I have identified 10 areas for our joint action, the executive
and the legislative branches of our Government.

Number one: food. America is the world's champion producer of food. Food prices and petroleum prices in the United States are primary inflationary factors. America today partially depends on foreign sources for petroleum, but we can grow more than enough food for ourselves.

To halt higher food prices, we must produce more food, and I call
upon every farmer to produce to full capacity. And I say to you and to the
farmers, they have done a magnificent job in the past, and we should be
eternally grateful.

This Government, however, will do all in its power to assure him—that farmer—he can sell his entire yield at reasonable prices. Accordingly, I ask the Congress to remove all remaining acreage limitations on rice, peanuts, and cotton.

I also assure America's farmers here and now that I will allocate
all the fuel and ask authority to allocate all the fertilizer they need to do
this essential job.

Agricultural marketing orders and other Federal regulations are
being reviewed to eliminate or modify those responsible for inflated prices.

I have directed our new Council on Wage and Price Stability to find
and to expose all restrictive practices, public or private, which raise food
prices. The Administration will also monitor food production, margins,
pricing, and exports. We can and we shall have an adequate supply at
home, and through cooperation, meet the needs of our trading partners
abroad.

Over this past weekend, we initiated a voluntary program to monitor
grain exports. The Economic Policy Board will be responsible for deter-
mining the policy under this program.

In addition, in order to better allocate our supplies for export, I
ask that a provision be added to Public Law 480 under which we ship
food to the needy and friendly countries. The President needs authority to
waive certain of the restrictions on shipments based on national interest or
humanitarian grounds.

Number two: energy. America's future depends heavily on oil, gas,
coal, electricity, and other resources called energy. Make no mistake, we
do have a real energy problem.

One-third of our oil—17 percent of America's total energy—now
comes from foreign sources that we cannot control, at high cartel prices
costing you and me $16 billion—$16 billion more than just a year ago.

The primary solution has to be at home. If you have forgotten the
shortages of last winter, most Americans have not.

I have ordered today the reorganization of our national energy effort
and the creation of a National Energy Board. It will be chaired with
developing—or I should say charged with developing a single national
energy policy and program. And I think most of you will be glad to know

Volume 10—Number 41

that our former colleague, Rog Morton, our Secretary of Interior, will
be the overall boss of our national energy program.

Rog Morton's marching orders are to reduce imports of foreign oil
by 1 million barrels per day by the end of 1975, whether by savings here
at home, or by increasing our own sources.

Secretary Morton, along with his other responsibility, is also charged
with increasing our domestic energy supply by promptly utilizing our coal
resources and expanding recovery of domestic oil still in the grounds in
old wells.

New legislation will be sought after your recess to require use of
cleaner coal processes and nuclear fuel in new electric plants, and the
quick conversion of existing oil plants. I propose that we, together, set a
target date of 1980 for eliminating oil-fired plants from the Nation's base-
loaded electrical capacity.

I will use the Defense Production Act to allocate scarce materials
for energy development, and I will ask you, the House and Senate, for
whatever amendments prove necessary.

I will meet with top management of the automobile industry to
assure, either by agreement or by law, a firm program aimed at achieving
a 40 percent increase in gasoline mileage within a 4-year devolopment
deadline.

Priority legislation—action, I should say—to increase energy supply
here at home requires the following:

- One, long-sought deregulation of natural gas supplies,

- Number two, responsible use of our Naval petroleum reserves in California and Alaska,

- Number three, amendments to the Clean Air Act; and

- Four, passage of surface mining legislation to ensure an adequate
  supply with commonsense environmental protection.

Now, if all of these steps fail to meet our current energy-saving goals,
I will not hesitate to ask for tougher measures. For the long range, we
must work harder on coal gasification. We must push with renewed vigor
and talent research in the use of nonfossil fuels. The power of the atom,
the heat of the sun and the steam stored deep in the earth, the force of
the winds and water must be main sources of energy for our grandchildren,
and we can do it.

Number three: restrictive practices. To increase productivity and
contain prices, we must end restrictive and costly practices whether insti-
tuted by Government, industry, labor, or others. And I am determined
to return to the vigorous enforcement of antitrust laws.

The Administration will zero in on more effective enforcement of
laws against price fixing and bid rigging. For instance, non-competitive
professional fee schedules and real estate settlement fees must be elim-
inated. Such violations will be prosecuted by the Department of Justice
to the full extent of the law.

Now, I ask Congress for prompt authority to increase maximum
penalties for antitrust violations from $50,000 to $1 million for corpo-
rations, and from $50,000 to $100,000 for individual violators.

At the Conference on Inflation we found, I would say, very broad
agreement that the Federal Government imposes too many hidden and

1242

too many inflationary costs on our economy. As a result, I propose a four-point program aimed at a substantial purging process.

Number one, I have ordered the Council on Wage and Price Stability to be the watchdog over inflationary costs of all Governmental actions.

Two, I ask the Congress to establish a National Commission on Regulatory Reform to undertake a long-overdue total reexamination of the independent regulatory agencies. It will be a joint effort by the Congress, the executive branch, and the private sector to identify and eliminate existing Federal rules and regulations that increase costs to the consumer without any good reason in today's economic climate.

Three. Hereafter, I will require that all major legislative proposals, regulations, and rules emanating from the executive branch of the Government will include an inflation impact statement that certifies we have carefully weighed the effect on the Nation. I respectfully request that the Congress require a similar advance inflation impact statement for its own legislative initiatives.

Finally, I urge State and local units of government to undertake similar programs to reduce inflationary effects of their regulatory activities.

At this point, I thank the Congress for recently revitalizing the National Commission on Productivity and Work Quality. It will initially concentrate on problems of productivity in Government—Federal, State and local. Outside of Government, it will develop meaningful blueprints for labor-management cooperation at the plant level. It should look particularly at the construction and the health service industries.

The Council on Wage and Price Stability will, of course, monitor wage and price increases in the private sector. Monitoring will include public hearings to justify either price or wage increases. I emphasize, in fact reemphasize, that this is not a compulsory wage and price control agency.

Now, I know many Americans see Federal controls as the answer. But I believe from past experience controls show us that they never really stop inflation—not the last time, not even during and immediately after World War II when, as I recall, prices rose despite severe and enforceable wartime rationing.

Now, peacetime controls actually, we know from recent experience, create shortages, hamper production, stifle growth and limit jobs. I do not ask for such powers, however politically tempting, as such a program could cause the fixer and the black marketer to flourish while decent citizens face empty shelves and stand in long waiting lines.

Number four: We need more capital. We cannot "eat up our seed corn." Our free enterprise system depends on orderly capital markets through which the savings of our people become productively used. Today, our capital markets are in total disarray. We must restore their vitality. Prudent monetary restraint is essential.

You and the American people should know, however, that I have personally been assured by the Chairman of the independent Federal Reserve Board that the supply of money and credit will expand sufficiently to meet the needs of our economy and, that in no event will a credit crunch occur.

Volume 10—Number 41

[L]

1243

The prime lending rate is going down. To help industry to buy more machines and create more jobs, I am recommending a liberalized 10 percent investment tax credit. This credit should be especially helpful to capital-intensive industries such as primary metals, public utilities, where capacity shortages have developed.

I am asking Congress to enact tax legislation to provide that all dividends on preferred stocks issued for cash be fully deductible by the issuing company. This should bring in more capital, especially for energy-producing utilities. It will also help other industries shift from debt to equity, providing a sounder capital structure.

Capital gains tax legislation must be liberalized as proposed by the tax reform bill currently before the Committee on Ways and Means. I endorse this approach and hope that it will pass promptly.

Number five: Helping the casualties. And this is a very important part of the overall speech. The Conference on Inflation made everybody even more aware of who is suffering most from inflation. Foremost are those who are jobless through no fault of their own.

Three weeks ago, I released funds which, with earlier actions, provide public service employment for some 170,000 who need work. I now propose to the Congress a two-step program to augment this action.

First, 13 weeks of special unemployment insurance benefits would be provided to those who have exhausted their regular and extended unemployment insurance benefits, and 26 weeks of special unemployment insurance benefits to those who qualify but are not now covered by regular unemployment insurance programs. Funding in this case would come from the general treasury, not from taxes on employers as is the case with the established unemployment programs.

Second, I ask the Congress to create a brand new Community Improvement Corps to provide work for the unemployed through short-term useful work projects to improve, beautify, and enhance the environment of our cities, our towns, and our countryside.

This standby program would come alive whenever unemployment exceeds 6 percent nationally. It would be stopped when unemployment drops below 6 percent. Local labor markets would each qualify for grants whenever their unemployment rate exceeds 6.5 percent.

State and local government contractors would supervise these projects and could hire only those who had exhausted their unemployment insurance benefits. The goal of this new program is to provide more constructive work for all Americans, young or old, who cannot find a job.

The purpose really follows this formula: Short-term problems require short-term remedies. I therefore request that these programs be for a 1-year period.

Now, I know that low- and middle-income Americans have been hardest hit by inflation. Their budgets are most vulnerable because a larger part of their income goes for the highly inflated costs of food, fuel, and medical care.

The tax reform bill now in the House Committee on Ways and Means, which I favor, already provides approximately $1.6 billion of tax relief to these groups. Compensating new revenues are provided in this prospective legislation by a windfall tax, profits tax on oil producers, and by closing other loopholes. If enacted, this will be a major contribution by

Volume 10—Number 41

1244

PRESIDENTIAL DOCUMENTS: CERALD R. FORD, 1974

the Congress in common effort to make our tax system fairer to all.

Number six: stimulating housing. Without question, credit is the lifeblood of housing. The United States, unfortunately, is suffering the longest and the most severe housing recession since the end of World War II. Unemployment in the construction trades is twice the national average.

One of my first acts as President was to sign the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974. I have since concluded that still more help is needed, help that can be delivered very quickly and with minimum inflationary impact.

I urge the Congress to enact before recess, additional legislation to make most home mortgages eligible for purchase by an agency of the Federal Government. As the law stands now, only FHA or VA home mortgages, one-fifth of the total, are covered.

I am very glad that the Senate, thanks to the leadership of Senator Brooke and Senator Cranston, has already made substantial progress on this legislation. As soon as it comes to me. I will make at least $3 billion immediately available for mortgage purchases, enough to finance about 100,000 more American homes.

Number seven: thrift institutions. Savings and loan and similar institutions are hard hit by inflation and high interest rates. They no longer attract, unfortunately, adequate deposits. The executive branch, in my judgment, must join with the Congress in giving critically needed attention to the structure and the operation of our thrift institutions which now find themselves for the third time in 8 years in another period of serious mortgage credit scarcity.

Passage of the pending financial institution bill will help, but no single measure has yet appeared, as I see it, to solve feast or famine in mortgage credit. However, I promise to work with you individually and collectively to develop additional specific programs in this area in the future.

Number eight: international interdependency. The United States has a responsibility not only to maintain a healthy economy at home, but also to seek policies which complement rather than disrupt the constructive efforts of others.

Essential to U.S. initiatives is the early passage of an acceptable trade reform bill. My Special Representative for Trade Negotiations departed earlier this afternoon to Canada, Europe, Japan, to brief foreign friends on my proposals.

We live in an interdependent world and, therefore, must work together to resolve common economic problems.

Number nine: Federal taxes and spending. To support programs, to increase production and share inflation-produced hardships, we need additional tax revenues.

I am aware that any proposal for new taxes just 4 weeks before a national election is, to put it mildly, considered politically unwise. And I am frank to say that I have been earnestly advised to wait and talk about taxes anytime after November 5. But I do say in sincerity that I will not play politics with America's future.

Our present inflation to a considerable degree comes from many years of enacting expensive programs without raising enough revenues

Volume 10—Number 41

1245

to pay for them. The truth is that 19 out of the 25 years I had the honor and the privilege to serve in this Chamber, the Federal Government ended up with Federal deficits. That is not a very good batting average.

By now, almost everybody—almost everybody else, I should say—has stated my position on Federal gasoline taxes. This time I will do it myself. I am not—emphasizing not—asking you for any increase in gas taxes.

I am—I am asking you to approve a 1-year temporary tax surcharge of 5 percent on corporate and upper-level individual incomes. This would generally exclude from the surcharge those families with gross incomes below $15,000 a year. The estimated $5 billion in extra revenue to be raised by this inflation-fighting tax should pay for the new programs I have recommended in this message.

I think, and I suspect each of you know, this is the acid test of our joint determination to whip inflation in America. I would not ask this if major loopholes were not now being closed by the Committee on Ways and Means' tax reform bill.

I urge you to join me before your recess—in addition to what I have said before—to join me by voting to set a target spending limit—let me emphasize it—a target spending limit of $300 billion for the Federal fiscal budget of 1975.

When Congress agrees to this spending target, I will submit a package of budget deferrals and rescissions to meet this goal. I will do the tough job of designating for Congressional action, on your return, those areas which I believe can and must be reduced. These will be hard choices and everyone of you in this Chamber know it as well as I. They will be hard choices, but no Federal agency, including the Defense Department, will be untouchable.

It is my judgment that fiscal discipline is a necessary weapon in any fight against inflation. While this spending target is a small step, it is a step in the right direction, and we need to get on that course without any further delay. I do not think that any of us in this Chamber today can ask the American people to tighten their belts if Uncle Sam is unwilling to tighten his belt first.

And now, if I might, I would like to say a few words directly to your constituents and, incidentally, mine.

My fellow Americans, 10 days ago I asked you to get things started by making a list of 10 ways to fight inflation and save energy, to exchange your list with your neighbors, and to send me a copy.

I have personally read scores of the thousands of letters received at the White House, and incidentally, I have made my economic experts read some of them, too. We all benefited, at least I did, and I thank each and every one of you for this cooperation.

Some of the good ideas from your home to mine have been cranked into the recommendations I have just made to the Congress and the steps I am taking as President to whip inflation right now. There were also firm warnings on what Government must not do, and I appreciated those, too. Your best suggestions for voluntary restraint and self-discipline showed me that a great degree of patriotic determination and unanimity already exists in this great land.

I have asked Congress for urgent specific actions it alone can take. I advised Congress of the initial steps that I am taking as President. Here

Volume 10—Number 41

-1248-

is what only you can do: Unless every able American pitches in, Congress and I cannot do the job. Winning our fight against inflation and waste involves total mobilization of America's greatest resources—the brains, the skills, and the willpower of the American people.

Here is what we must do, what each and every one of you can do: To help increase food and lower prices, grow more and waste less; to help save scarce fuel in the energy crisis, drive less, heat less. Every housewife knows almost exactly how much she spent for food last week. If you cannot spare a penny from your food budget—and I know there are many—surely you can cut the food that you waste by 5 percent.

Every American motorist knows exactly how many miles he or she drives to work or to school every day and about how much mileage she or he runs up each year. If we all drive at least 5 percent fewer miles, we can save, almost unbelievably, 250,000 barrels of foreign oil per day. By the end of 1975, most of us can do better than 5 percent by car pooling, taking the bus, riding bikes, or just plain walking. We can save enough gas by self-discipline to meet our 1 million barrels per day goal.

I think there is one final thing that all Americans can do, rich or poor, and that is share with others. We can share burdens as we can share blessings. Sharing is not easy, not easy to measure like mileage and family budgets, but I am sure that 5 percent more is not nearly enough to ask, so I ask you to share everything you can and a little bit more. And it will strengthen our spirits as well as our economy.

Today I will not take more of the time of this busy Congress, for I vividly remember the rush before every recess, and the clock is already running on my specific and urgent requests for legislative action. I also remember how much Congress can get done when it puts its shoulder to the wheel.

One week from tonight I have a longstanding invitation in Kansas City to address the Future Farmers of America, a fine organization of wonderful young people whose help, with millions of others, is vital in this battle. I will elaborate then how volunteer inflation fighters and energy savers can further mobilize their total efforts.

Since asking Miss Sylvia Porter, the well-known financial writer, to help me organize an all-out nationwide volunteer mobilization, I have named a White House coordinator and have enlisted the enthusiastic support and services of some 17 other distinguished Americans to help plan for citizen and private group participation.

There will be no big Federal bureaucracy set up for this crash program. Through the courtesy of such volunteers from the communication and media fields, a very simple enlistment form will appear in many of tomorrow's newspapers along with the symbol of this new mobilization, which I am wearing on my lapel. It bears the single word WIN. I think that tells it all. I will call upon every American to join in this massive mobilization and stick with it until we do win as a nation and as a people.

Mr. Speaker and Mr. President, I stand on a spot hallowed by history. Many Presidents have come here many times to solicit, to scold, to flatter, to exhort the Congress to support them in their leadership. Once in a great while Presidents have stood here and truly inspired the most skeptical and the most sophisticated audience of their co-equal partners in

Volume 10—Number 41

[L] 1247

Government. Perhaps once or twice in a generation is there such a joint
session. I don't expect this one to be.

Only two of my predecessors have come in person to call upon Con-
gress for a declaration of war, and I shall not do that. But I say to you with
all sincerity, that our inflation, our public enemy number one, will, unless
whipped destroy our country, our homes, our liberties, our property, and
finally our national pride, as surely as any well-armed wartime enemy.

I concede there will be no sudden Pearl Harbor to shock us into
unity and to sacrifice, but I think we have had enough early warnings. The
time to intercept is right now. The time to intercept is almost gone.

My friends and former colleagues, will you enlist now? My friends
and fellow Americans, will you enlist now? Together with discipline and
determination, we will win.

I thank you very much.

NOTE: The President spoke at 4:02 p.m. in the House Chamber at the Capitol, after being introduced by Carl Albert, Speaker of the House of Representatives. The address was broadcast live on radio and television.

## Death of Paul G. Hoffman

*Statement by the President. October 8, 1974*

Paul Gray Hoffman's life was not one success story but many. A talented, dynamic businessman, he went on to serve both America and the world as an inspired public servant and a great humanitarian.

His work with the Studebaker Packard Corp. marked him as one of the giants of American industry. At the end of World War II, as the first Administrator of the Marshall Plan, his intelligence and compassion helped to rebuild a Europe that was in ruins. Mr. Hoffman served with equal distinction in important posts at the United Nations and with the Ford Foundation and the Fund for the Republic.

His life was as long as it was eventful. To his wife Anna, a distinguished public servant in her own right, and to the other members of the family, Mrs. Ford and I express our deepest sympathy and regret on the passing of a great and beloved American.

NOTE: Paul G. Hoffman, 86, died in New York City, on October 8, 1974.

He served as the first Administrator for Economic Cooperation under the Marshall Plan in 1948, and was president of the Ford Foundation from 1950 to 1953. He was managing director of the United Nations Special Fund, later the United Nations Development Program, from 1959 to 1972.

Mr. Hoffman was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom on June 21, 1974.

## Visit of First Secretary Edward Gierek of Poland

*Exchange of Toasts Between the President and First Secretary Gierek at a Dinner Honoring the First Secretary. October 8, 1974*

THE PRESIDENT. Mr. First Secretary, and Mrs. Gierek, our wonderful guests:

It is a great privilege and pleasure to have you and
Mrs. Gierek here with us this evening. We have had a
very delightful dinner, and we had a very helpful and
constructive discussion during the day, and I am looking
forward to further discussions tomorrow.

Mr. First Secretary, I come from a part of our country where we have roughly 30,000 people with a Polish heritage or background. And as I grew up, Mr. First Secretary, I had many wonderful personal experiences with families that had a Polish background, families that had the same great family strength, families that had a tremendous religious dedication, individuals with a Polish heritage that became leaders in our community, outstand-ing scholars, athletes, public servants.

And so I had a great exposure to the finest, the best, with individuals who had come from your country to ours.

And then in 1958 or '59, I had the opportunity to go
to Poland, and I wondered as I went to Poland whether

Volume 10—Number 41

SUGGESTED REPLY

Dear Mr. and Mrs. Speck:

The President has asked me to reply to your letter of
November 7 with which you enclosed a check for $200 to
be used for the purchase of grain for the people of
Bangladesh.

I appreciate your concern over the food situation in
Bangladesh, and your willingness to help. Let me assure
you that the U.S. Government shares your concern, and
that action has been taken and continues to be taken
under various official programs to provide food and
other emergency supplies. While there is no procedure
for us to channel contributions from private citizens
into relief efforts in Bangladesh, there are several
international voluntary agencies with active programs
there, and I am sure that they would be most grateful for
your contribution. I suggest you may wish to contact
one of the following organizations:

CARE, Inc.
1028 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20036

Mr. and Mrs. Charles Speck,
302 South Oakland Street,
Carbondale, Illinois.

- 2 -

Catholic Relief Services
1011 First Avenue
New York, New York 10022
United Nations Children's Emergency Fund (UNICEF)
331 East 38th Street
New York, New York 10060
Senator George McGovern
Chairman
Bangladesh Emergency Relief Fund
P.O. Box 23530
L'Enfant Plaza Station
Washington, D.C. 20024

Thank you for your interest. I hope the foregoing information will be useful to you. If I can be of further assistance please let me know.

[LC]

THE WHITE HOUSE OFFICE

7422443

REFERRAL

To: The Secretary of State

Date: November 14, 1974

ACTION REQUESTED

[X] Draft reply for:

[ ] President's signature.

[X] Undersigned's signature.

[ ] Memorandum for use as enclosure to reply.

[ ] Direct reply.

[ ] Furnish information copy.

[ ] Suitable acknowledgment or other appropriate handling.

[ ] Furnish copy of reply, if any.

[ ] For your information.

[ ] For comment.

NOTE

Prompt action is essential.

If more than 72 hours' delay is encountered, please telephone the undersigned immediately, Code 1450.456-2724

Basic correspondence should be returned when draft reply, memorandum, or comment is requested.

REMARKS:

Also referred to Agriculture. SUSPENSE DATE - NOVEMBER 25.

Check for $200 will be returned to writer but please include names and addresses for donation alternatives for Bangladesh.

Description:

[X] Letter: __________ Telegram: Other:

To: The President
From: Mr. and Mrs. Charles Speck, 302 S. Oakland Street, Carbondale, Ill.
Date: November 7, 1974
Subject: Writer sends in check to be used for purchase of grain from this country for Bangladesh.

By direction of the President:

Roland L. Elliott
Special Assistant
to the President

RLE:JHH:pb

(Copy to remain with correspondence)

7422443

302 S. Oakland St.
Carbondale, Ill. 62901

November 7, 1974

President Gerald Ford
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
Washington, D. C.

Dear Mr. President:

Enclosed you will find a check for $200. to be used
for purchase of grain from this country for Bangladesh. I
understand the people in that country need food badly right
now. This is to let you know that there are people in this
country who are willing to commit themselves and our country
to such humanitarian needs.

You and Mr. Kissinger are to be lauded for Mr. Kissinger's opening remarks at the World Food Conference in Rome now going on. Enclosed is a copy of the remarks I am speaking about.

Mr. President, what is this new problem regarding twenty year old laws which limit the number of acres to be used in the production of rice on the Arkansas farmlands. Can not such food production laws be changed when there is a food shortage throughout certain countries and when there are people in the world in need of food. Please speak to this issue before the Congress.

Thank you sincerely for all of your efforts in behalf
of this world's poor.

Encl. 2

CC. Sen. Charles Percy, Adlai Stevenson
Congressman Paul Simon

["Food bank...", "Washington Star-News\nAnd Associated Press\nRome", "Secretary of State Henry A.\nKissinger today asked the other\nmajor grain suppliers to join the\nUnited States in a food bank to\nensure that \"within a decade no\nchild will go to bed hungry . . .\nno family will fear for its next\nday's bread.\"", "As the World Food Conference\nconvened, with Kissinger as its\nmain opening-day speaker,\nthousands of leftist students", "marched in downtown Rome to\nprotest the American's presence\nin Italy.", "Four young men stormed the\nRome office of Honeywell Corp.,\nthe electronics firm, beat up a\nwoman telephone operator and\nset the place afire with a\nhomemade bomb. The\nHoneywell offices are about two\nmiles from the Colosseum,\nwhere a rally by a dozen Marx-\nist splinter groups ended about\nhalf an hour before the at-\ntack.", "Kissinger told the conference\nthat the aim of the United States\nis \"a bold objective\" to cope\nwith \"the source of hunger\"\naround the world, the lack of\ngrain stockpiles.", "The system he envisioned\nwould include receiving for\nemergency food relief and\npunitive measures for countries\nthat failed to meet their com-\nmitments.", "Kissinger linked the energy\ncrisis with the food crisis,\ndeclaring that the oil exporting", "Kissinger: 'Within a decade no child will go to bed hungry... no family will fear for its next day's bread'", "countries have a \"special\nresponsibility.\" He called, on\nthese new financial powers to\njoin with food exporting nations\nto make a major effort to pro-\nvide the food and funds to\neliminate starvation.", "Senior U.S. officials called\nKissinger's proposals \"fairly\nrevolutionary.\"", "Kissinger's proposals, it was\nunderstood, were cleared with\nPresident Ford and represent\nofficial U.S. policy despite prior\ndifferences between Kissinger", "and Agriculture Secretary Earl\nL. Butz. The proposals would\ngive the State Department a\ngreater role than ever before\nin agricultural affairs.", "The new World Food Reserve\nsystem proposed by Kissinger\nwould be open to all the in-\ndustrial Western nations, the\nnewly-rich Petroleum states, the\nThird World countries as well as\nthe columnist bloc nations.", "A senior U.S. official, noting\nthat the Soviet Union and Com-\nmunist bloc countries now use", "the free market to supplement\ntheir own food supplies, said\nthat if the Communist nations do\nnot join the international\nreserve system, priorities for\nfood from the world reserve will\nbe given to those which do join\nthe system.", "In urging newly-rich oil pro-\nducing states to help poorer\ncountries buy food, Kissinger\nnoted that quadrupled prices for\ncrude oil over the last year have\nproduced a surplus of around $50\nbillion in the oil states. At the", "same time, they\nhardly know if\nthat has a bad effect\nto open up new areas\non other lands.", "\"The\ndecals\nabout\nto go\nin a\nyear\nbeyond\nthe\nborders\nof\nthe\nworld.\nThere\nare\nplenty\nof\nbillionaire\ncountries\nto buy\nthe\noil\nin\nthe\nborders\nof\nthe\nworld.\nThere\nare\nplenty\nof\nmillionaires\nto buy\nthe\noil\nin\nthe\nborders\nof\nthe\nworld.\nThere\nare\nplenty\nof\nbillionaires\nto buy\nthe\noil\nin\nthe\nborders\nof\n

TOTALLY EMBARGOED
UNTIL 4 p.m. EDT

OCTOBER 8, 1974

THE WHITE HOUSE

TEXT OF AN ADDRESS BY THE PRESIDENT
TO BE DELIVERED TO A
JOINT SESSION OF THE CONGRESS

Mr. Speaker, Mr. President, distinguished guests and my very dear friends:

In his first inaugural address, President Franklin D. Roosevelt said: "The people of the United States have not failed ... They want direct, vigorous action ... They have asked for discipline and direction under leadership."

Today, though our economic difficulties do not approach the emergency of 1933, the message from the American people is the same. I trust you are getting the same message: Our constituents want leadership and action.

The 73rd Congress responded to FDR's appeal in five days.

I am deeply grateful for the cooperation of the 93rd Congress in the Conference on Inflation which ended 10 days ago. Mr. Speaker, many -- but not all -- of your recommendations on behalf of your party's Caucus are reflected in some of my proposals. The distinguished Majority Leader of the Senate offered a nine-point program. I seriously studied all and adopted some of his suggestions.

I might add I have also listened hard to my many other former colleagues in both bodies and of both the majority and minority, and have been both persuaded and dissuaded. But in the end I had to decide, as each of you do when the roll is called.

I will not take your time today with a discussion of the origins of inflation and its bad effect on the United States. I know where we want to be in 1976 -- on the 200th Birthday of a United States of America that has not lost its way, nor its will, nor its sense of national purpose.

During the meetings on inflation, I listened carefully to the many valuable proposals offered. Since the summit, I have evaluated hundreds of ideas, day and night.

(MORE)

My conclusions are simply stated. There is only one point on which all advisers agree: We must whip inflation now.

None of the remedies proposed -- great or small, compulsory or voluntary -- stands a chance unless they are combined in a considered package, in a concerted effort, in a grand design.

I have reviewed the past and present effort of our Federal Government to help the economy. They are simply not good enough, nor sufficiently broad, nor do they pack the punch that will turn on America's economy.

A stable American economy cannot be sustained if the world's economy is in chaos. International cooperation is essential. But while we seek agreement with other nations, let us put our own economic house in order.

Today, I have identified 10 areas for our joint action.

## NUMBER ONE: FOOD

America is the world's champion producer of food. Food prices and petroleum prices in the United States are primary inflationary factors. America today partially depends on foreign sources for petroleum. But we can grow more than enough food for ourselves.

To halt higher food prices, we must produce more food. I call upon every farmer to produce to full capacity. This Government will do all in its power to assure him he can sell his entire yield at reasonable prices. Accordingly, I ask the Congress to remove all remaining acreage limitations on rice, peanuts and cotton.

I also assure America's farmers here and now that I will allocate all the fuel and ask authority to allocate all fertilizer they need to do the job.

I have directed our new Council on Wage and Price stability to find and expose all restrictive practices, public or private, which raise food prices.

The Administration will also monitor food production, margins, pricing and exports. We can and shall have adequate supplies at home, and through cooperation, meet the needs of our trading partners abroad. Over this past weekend, we initiated a voluntary program to monitor grain exports. The Economic Policy Board will be responsible for determining the policy under this program. In addition, in order to better allocate our supplies for export, I ask that a provision be added to Public Law 480, under which we ship food to needy and friendly countries. I need authority to waive certain of the restrictions on shipments based on national interest or humanitarian grounds.

(MORE)

- 3 -

NUMBER TWO: ENERGY.

America's future depends heavily on oil, gas, coal, electricity, and other resources called energy. Make no mistake -- we have a real energy problem. One-third of our oil -- 17 percent of America's total energy -- now comes from foreign sources we cannot control -- at high cartel prices costing you and me $16 billion more than just a year ago.

The primary solution has to be at home. If you've forgotten the shortages of last winter, I have not.

I have ordered today the reorganization of our national energy effort and the creation of a National Energy Board. It will be charged with developing a single national energy policy and program.

You will ge glad to know that our former colleague, Rog Morton, Secretary of the Interior, will be the overall boss of our national energy program. His marching orders are to reduce imports of foreign oil by one million barrels per day by the end of 1975, whether by savings here at home or by increasing our own sources.

Secretary Morton also is charged with increasing our domestic energy supply by promptly utilizing coal resources and expanding recovery of domestic oil still in the ground in old wells.

New legislation will be sought after your recess to require use of cleaner coal processes and nuclear fuel in new electric plants and the quick conversion of existing oil plants. I propose that we together set a target date of 1980 for eliminating oil-fired plants from the Nation's base-loaded electrical capacity.

I will use the existing Defense Production Act to allocate scarce materials for energy development and I will ask you for whatever amendments prove necessary. I will meet with top management of the automobile industry to assure -- either by agreement or by law -- a firm program aimed at achieving a 40 percent increase in gasoline mileage within a four year development deadline.

Priority legislative action to increase energy supply requires:

(1) long sought deregulation of natural gas supplies,

(2) responsible use of our Naval petroleum reserves in California and Alaska,

(3) amendments to the Clean Air Act, and

(4) passage of surface mining legislation to ensure adequate supply with common sense environmental protection.

(MORE)

-4-

[L]

If all these steps fail to meet our current energy-saving goals, I will not hesitate to ask for tougher measures.

For the long-range, we must work harder on coal gasification. We must push with renewed vigor and talent research in the use of non-fossil fuels.
The power of the atom, the heat of the sun and steam stored deep in the earth, the force of winds and water must be main sources of energy for our grandchildren.

NUMBER THREE: RESTRICTIVE PRACTICES.

To increase productivity and contain prices, we must end restrictive practices whether instituted by Government, industry, labor or others.

I am determined to return to the vigorous enforcement of anti-trust laws.

My Administration will zero in on more effective enforcement of laws against price-fixing and bid-rigging. For instance, non-competitive professional fee schedules and real estate settlement fees must be eliminated. Such violations will be prosecuted by the Department of Justice to the full extent of the law.

I ask the Congress for prompt authority to increase maximum penalties for anti-trust violations from $50,000 to $1 million for corporations and from $50,000 to $100,000 for individual violators.

At the Conference on Inflation, we found broad agreement that the Federal Government imposes too many hidden and inflationary costs on our economy. As a result, I propose a four-point purging process:

1. I have ordered my Council on Wage and Price Stability to be the watchdog over inflationary costs of all governmental actions.

2. I ask the Congress to establish a National Commission on Regulatory Reform to undertake a long-overdue total re-examination of the independent regulatory agencies. It will be a joint effort by the Congress, the Executive Branch and the private sector to identify and eliminate existing Federal rules and regulations that increase costs to the consumer, without good reason, in today's economic climate.

3. Hereafter, I will require that all major legislative proposals, regulations, and rules emanating from the Executive Branch include an Inflation Impact Statement that certifies we have carefully weighed their effect on inflation. I respectfully request that Congress require similar advance Inflation Impact Statements for its own legislative initiatives.

4. Finally, I urge State and local governments to undertake similar programs to reduce inflationary effects of their regulatory activities.

I thank the Congress for recently revitalizing the National Council on Productivity. It will initially concentrate on problems of productivity in government -- Federal, State and local. Outside of government, it will develop meaningful blueprints for labor-management cooperation at the plant level. It should look particularly at the construction and health service industries.

The Council on Wage and Price Stability will of course monitor wage and price practices in the private sector. Monitoring will include public hearings to justify either price or wage increases.

(MORE)

- 5 -

I emphasize this is not a compulsory wage and price control agency.

I know many Americans see Federal controls as the answer. But controls never really stop inflation -- not the last time -- not even during and immediately after World War II when, as I remember, prices rose despite severe and enforceable wartime rationing.

Peacetime controls actually create shortages, hamper production, stifle growth and limit jobs. I do not ask for such powers, however tempting politically, as such a program could cause the fixer and the black marketer to flourish while decent citizens face empty shelves and stand in long waiting lines.

## NUMBER FOUR: WE NEED MORE CAPITAL

We cannot "eat up our seed corn." Our free enterprise system depends on orderly capital markets through which the savings of our people become productively used. Today our capital markets are in disarray. We must restore their vitality. Prudent monetary restraint is essential.

You and the American people should know, however, that I have personally been assured by the Chairman of the independent Federal Reserve Board that the supply of money and credit will expand sufficiently to meet the needs of our economy, and that, in no event, will a credit crunch occur.

To help industry to buy more machines and create more jobs, I am recommending a liberalized ten percent investment tax credit. This credit should be especially helpful to capital-intensive industries, such as primary metals and public utilities where capacity shortages have developed.

I am asking Congress to enact tax legislation to provide that all dividends on preferred stocks, issued for cash be fully deductible by the issuing company. This should bring in more capital -- especially for energy-producing utilities. It will also help other industries shift from debt to equity, providing sounder capital structure.

Capital gains taxation must be liberalized as proposed by the tax reform bill currently before the Committee on Ways and Means. I endorse this approach and hope you will pass it promptly.

## NUMBER FIVE: HELPING THE CASUALTIES

The Conference on Inflation made everybody even more aware of who is suffering most from inflation. Foremost are those who are jobless through no fault of their own. Three weeks ago, I released funds which, with earlier actions, provide public service employment for 170,000 who need work. I now propose to the Congress a two-step program to augment this action.

First, 13 weeks of special unemployment insurance benefits would be provided to those who have exhausted their regular and extended unemployment insurance benefits and 26 weeks of special unemployment insurance benefits to those who qualify but are not now covered by a regular unemployment insurance program. Funding would come from the general treasury, not from taxes on employers as is the case with the established programs.

(MORE)

Second, I ask the Congress to create a brand-new Community Improvement Corps to provide work for the unemployed through short-term useful work projects to improve, beautify and enhance the environment of our cities, towns, and countryside. This standby program would come alive whenever unemployment exceeds six percent nationally. It would be stopped when unemployment drops below six percent.

Local labor markets would each qualify for grants whenever their unemployment rate exceeded 6.5 percent.

State and local government contractors would supervise these projects and could hire only those who had exhausted their unemployment insurance benefits. The goal of this new program is to provide more constructive work for Americans--young or old--who cannot find a job.

Short-term problems require short-term remedies. I therefore request that these programs be for one year.

I know that low and middle-income Americans have been hardest hit by inflation. Their budgets are most vulnerable because a larger part of their income goes for the highly-inflated costs of food, fuel, and medical care. The tax reform bill now in the House Committee on Ways and Means, which I favor, already provides approximately $1.6 billion of tax relief to these groups. Compensating new revenues are provided in this prospective legislation by a windfall profits tax on oil producers and by closing other loopholes. If enacted, this will be a major contribution by the Congress in our common effort to make our tax system fairer to all.

## NUMBER SIX: STIMULATING HOUSING

The United States is suffering the longest and most severe housing recession since the end of World War II. Unemployment in the construction trades is twice the national average.

One of my first acts as President was to sign the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974. I have since concluded that still more help is needed--help that can be delivered quickly and with minimum inflationary impact.

I urge the Congress to enact, before your recess, additional legislation to make most home mortgages eligible for purchase by an agency of the Federal Government. As the law now stands, only FHA or VA home mortgages, one fifth of the total, are covered. I am glad that the Senate, thanks to the leadership of Senator Brooke and Senator Cranston, has already made substantial progress on this legislation. As soon as it comes to me, I will make at least 3 billion dollars immediately available for mortgage purchases, enough to finance about 100,000 homes.

## NUMBER SEVEN: THRIFT INSTITUTIONS

Savings and loan and similar institutions are hard hit by inflation and high interest rates. They no longer attract adequate deposits. The Executive Branch must join with the Congress in giving critically needed attention to the structure and operation of our thrift institutions which now find themselves for the third time in eight years in another period of serious mortgage credit scarcity.

- MORE -

Passage of the pending Financial Institution Bill will help. But no single measure has yet appeared to solve feast or famine in mortgage credit. However, I promise to work with you to develop additional specific programs in the future.

NUMBER EIGHT: INTERNATIONAL INTERDEPENDENCY

The United States has a responsibility not only to maintain a healthy economy at home but also to seek policies which complement, rather than disrupt, the constructive efforts of others.

Essential to U.S. initiatives is the early passage of an acceptable Trade Reform Bill. My Special Representative for Trade Negotiations departed earlier this afternoon to Canada, Europe and Japan to brief foreign friends on my proposals. We live in an interdependent world and therefore must work together to resolve common economic problems.

NUMBER NINE: FEDERAL TAXES AND SPENDING

To support programs to increase production and share inflation-produced hardships, we need additional tax revenues. I am aware that any proposal for new taxes just four weeks before a national election is -- to put it mildly -- considered politically unwise. I have been earnestly advised to wait and talk about taxes anytime after November 5th.

But I will not play politics with America's future.

Our present inflation to a considerable degree comes from many years of enacting expensive programs without raising enough new reveneus to pay for them. Nineteen out of the 25 years I served in this Chamber ended up with federal deficits.

By now almost everybody else has stated my position on Federal gasoline taxes. This time I'll do it myself. I am not asking you for any increase in gas taxes.

I am asking you to approve a one-year temporary tax surcharge of five percent on corporate and upper-level individual incomes. This would generally exclude from the surcharge those families with gross incomes below $15,000 a year. The estimated $5 billion in extra revenue to be raised by this Inflation Fighting tax should pay for all the new programs I have recommended in this message. This is the acid test of our joint determination to whip inflation. I would not ask this if major loopholes were not being closed by the Ways and Means Tax Reform Bill.

I urge you to join me before your recess by voting to set a target spending limit of $300 billion for the Federal fiscal 1975 budget. When Congress agrees to this spending target, I will submit a package of budget deferrals and recissions to meet this goal. I will do the tough job of designating for Congressional action, on your return, those areas which I believe can and must be reduced. These will be hard choices but no federal agency, including the Defense Department, will be untouchable.

Fiscal discipline is a necessary weapon in any fight against inflation. While this spending target is a small step, it is a start in the right direction. And we need to get on that course without further delay.

We cannot ask the American people to tighten their belts if Uncle Sam is unwilling to first tighten his.

And now, if I might, I would like to say a few words directly to your constituents and to mine.

(MORE)

- 8 -

My Fellow Americans:

Ten days ago I asked you to get things started by making a list of 10 ways to fight inflation and save energy, to exchange your list with neighbors and to send me a copy. I have personally read scores of the thousands of letters received at the White House.

And I have made my economic experts read them, too. We all benefitted -- at least I did. I thank each and every one of you.

Some of the good ideas from your home to mine have been cranked into the recommendations I have just made to the Congress and the steps I am taking as President to whip inflation now. There were also firm warnings on what government must not do.

Your best suggestions for voluntary restraint and self-discipline showed me that a great degree of patriotic determination and unanimity already exists in this country.

I have advised Congress of the initial steps I am taking as President.

Here's what only you can do. Unless every able American pitches in, Congress and I cannot do the job.

Winning our fight against inflation and waste involves total mobilization of America's greatest resources -- the brains, the skills and willpower of the American people.

Here is what we must do ... what each and everyone of you can do.

To help increase food and lower prices, GROW MORE, WASTE LESS.

To help save scarce fuel in the energy crisis, DRIVE LESS, HEAT LESS.

Every housewife knows almost exactly how much she spent for food last week. If you can't spare a penny from your food budget, surely you can cut the food you waste by 5%.

Every American motorist knows almost exactly how many miles he or she drives to work or school every day and about how much mileage she or he runs up each year. If we all drive at least 5% fewer miles we can save 250 to 300 thousand barrels of foreign oil per day. By the end of 1975, most of us can do much better than 5% by car pooling, taking the bus, riding bikes or just plain walking. We can have saved enough gas by self-discipline to meet our 1 million barrel per day goal.

(MORE)

-9-

There is one final thing that all Americans can do, rich or poor, and that is
Share With Others.

We can share burdens as well as blessings. Sharing is not as easy to measure
as mileage and family budgets, but I'm sure that 5% more is not nearly enough
to ask. So I ask you to share everything you can -- and a little bit more -- and
it will strengthen our spirits as well as our economy.

Today I will not take more of the time of this busy Congress -- for I remember
well the rush before every recess-- and the clock is already running on my
specific and urgent requests for legislative action. I also remember how much
Congress can get done when it wants to.

One week from tonight I have a long-standing invitation to Kansas City to address the Future Farmers of America, a fine organization of young people whose help, with millions of others, is vital in this battle. I will elaborate then on how volunteer Inflation Fighters and Energy Savers can further mobilize their total efforts.

Since asking Miss Sylvia Porter, the well-known financial writer, to help me
organize an all-out nationwide volunteer mobilization, I have named a White
House Coordinator and have enlisted the enthusiastic support and services of
some 17 other distinguished Americans to help plan for citizen and private
group participation. There will be no big new Federal bureaucracy set up for
this crash program.

Through the courtesy of such volunteers from the communications and media
fields a simple enlistment form will appear in many of tomorrow's newspapers
along with the symbol of this new mobilization, which I am wearing on my lapel.

It bears the single word "WIN." That tells it all. I will call upon every American
to join this massive mobilization and to stick with it until we win. For win we
will.

I stand on a spot hallowed by history. Many Presidents have come here many
times to solicit, to scold, to flatter and to exhort the Congress to support them
in their leadership. Once in a great while, Presidents have stood here and
truly inspired this most skeptical and sophisticated audience of their co-equal
partners in government. Perhaps once or twice in a generation is there such
a joint session. I do not expect this to be one.

Only two of my predecessors have come in person to call upon the Congress for
a declaration of war. I shall not do that. But I say to you with all sincerity
that inflation, our present public enemy will -- unless it is whipped -- destroy
our country, our homes, our liberties, our property, and finally our national
pride -- as surely as any well-armed wartime enemy.

There will be no sudden Pearl Harbor to shock us into unity and sacrifice.
But we have had enough early warnings. The time to intercept is almost gone.
My friends and former colleagues, will you enlist now? My friends and fellow
Americans, will you enlist now?

Together, with discipline and determination, we will win. Under the Constitution,
only the President can provide the essential leadership for great national undertakings. I accept it. With your help and God's, we will win.

###

#47-10/10/74

Miss Lammerding will begin her duties in
a few days and Mrs. Weidenfeld will start on
November 1.

I also would like to announce today that the
President and Mrs. Ford have asked Bradley H. Patterson, Jr.,
on whom you are about to get a biography, to join the
First Lady's staff on a temporary basis as an Assistant
for Staff Coordination.

Chancellor Helmut Schmidt of the Federal
Republic of Germany has accepted an invitation from President
Ford to pay an official visit to the United States.
The Chancellor will visit Washington December 5 and 6.
The meeting will provide an opportunity for the two
leaders to discuss issues of mutual concern.

Foreign Minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher will
accompany the Chancellor on the visit to the United
States.

The President will meet tomorrow afternoon
at 3:00 with the President of Somalia, Mohamed Siad Barre.
He is also Chairman of the Organization of African Unity.

The meeting will give President Ford an
opportunity to discuss with President Siad ways of
strengthening American ties with Africa, as well as
other general African issues and U.S.-Somalia bilateral
matters.

Q Do you have a handout?

MR. NESSEN: Like what?

Q Like the one you just had?

MR. NESSEN: Not that I know of.

Q I am having a hard time keeping up
with you, and I do need that.

MR. NESSEN: As you know, Secretary Kissinger
is in Cairo today. He met with Egyptian President Sadat
immediately after his arrival in Cairo last night, and
will meet with President Sadat again today.

Secretary Kissinger delivered a letter from
President Ford to President Sadat at the beginning
of his meeting last night. Secretary Kissinger departs for
Damascus tomorrow for talks with President Assad.

MORE

#47

1137

LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES

The President's Message to the Congress. September 12, 1974

To the Congress of the United States:

In my first address before a Joint Session of Congress, I spoke of "communication, conciliation, compromise and cooperation." The Congress responded. We have communicated, conciliated, compromised, and cooperated.

I thank the bipartisan leaders and all Members for this working partnership. So far, despite some spats, we have had a good marriage.

Landmark bills in the fields of *Education, Housing-Community Development, and Pension Reform* were passed. For these examples of cooperation of real benefit to so many Americans, I am grateful.

I had serious objections to the *SBA loan legislation, Public Works Appropriations, and D.C. Medical School bill*. Recognizing congressional interest in particular elements of each measure, I signed them.

No effort was made to override measures that I had to veto. Congress responded promptly to my request for a *Council on Wage and Price Stability*.

Of the specific proposals I am singling out today, some are in the conference stage. Others have passed only one body. A few have passed neither. But virtually all have been the subject of hearings and are in the mark-up phase.

NOMINATIONS

Of utmost importance for Congress in its fall term is the consideration of *Nelson Rockefeller* as my nominee for Vice President of the United States. The Administration will assist the Congress in all appropriate ways to expedite this nomination. The precedent for this procedure under the 25th Amendment to the Constitution has been established. I am sure there will be no inordinate delay in moving forward Governor Rockefeller's nomination.

There are other nominations before the Senate, some pending since last January. There are other candidates for Federal office in varying stages of clearance. I expect to be able to submit them to the Senate within a few days. I would hope Congress could expedite action on all these nominees so that none will have to be held over to 1975.

REDUCING 1975 SPENDING

Responding to the initiative of the distinguished majority leader of the Senate and other members of the Congress, I have convened bipartisan summit meetings on the issue of inflation. Many of you are participating. The legislative and executive branches are working together.

We are seeking short-term answers to short-term problems and long-term answers to long-term problems.

A concerted effort must be undertaken to bring spending down to manageable proportions. An important first step in this effort is to bring Federal outlays under control in 1975, making possible a balanced budget in 1976.

1138

I need the help of the Congress in reducing 1975 spending below $300 billion. Several important cooperative steps by the Congress will be required to achieve this difficult target.

First, the Congress must resist temptations to add to spending totals on legislation now being considered. Responsible action calls for agreements on cuts, not increases. I solicit suggestions on any programs that might be curtailed or stopped. Let me know about any spending that seems unnecessary or inflationary.

In the same vein, I would hope the Congress could pass specific legislation proposed in the February Budget submission that would reduce 1975 spending by almost $700 million.

Immediate action should be taken on the rescissions that I am proposing in my first message to the Congress under the newly-enacted *Budget and Impoundment Control Act*. Moreover, the deferrals transmitted to Congress under the same Act should be supported. Overturning these actions could increase spending by as much as $600 million in 1975 and by far more in 1976 and future years.

As a matter of highest priority, I need your support of my recommendation to defer the next *Federal pay raise* from October to January. It will be my intention to deal fairly with the just concerns of Federal workers. But I am asking them to join in the sacrifice I want all Americans to share. This action will reduce 1975 outlays by $700 million. It will also set an example of wage restraint for the private sector. Let us practice what we preach.

These efforts are essential if our cooperation is to keep spending under $300 billion. We simply cannot afford to fail.

## APPROPRIATIONS

Eight of fourteen regular appropriations bills have been enacted. These measures in total represent a reduction of $532 million from the Administration's Budget in spending authority and $144 million in outlays for the current fiscal year. These are helpful moves in the right direction. I urge that this momentum be maintained.

There are seven money bills that require action during the balance of the session.

The *Agriculture* money bill was vetoed on the basis of excessive funding; the *Defense* appropriation is in conference with very sharp reductions. Levels below the House bill would be extremely unwise. *State-Justice-Commerce* is also in conference and undoubtedly will show a reduction in the Budget; *Labor-HEW* appropriations, however, appear to be moving in the direction of exceeding the Budget substantially.

Appropriations for *Military Construction* and *Foreign Assistance* have not yet passed the House of Representatives.

There is ample time to consider the remaining appropriations bills before adjournment. In addition, I will be sending essential but carefully limited *Supplemental Requests* for fiscal year 1975. I trust they will be considered an urgent priority.

## LEGISLATION

It is unnecessary to submit a complete list of Administration legislative initiatives to this Congress. Leaders and Members know them as

Volume 10—Number 37

1139

well as I do. I recognize that the inevitable consequence of any legislative
Message in the twilight of the 93rd Congress is to suggest deferment of
some desirable legislation in favor of imperatives that are realistic in
the time we have left.

The *Trade Reform bill* has passed the House of Representatives but remains pending before the Senate Finance Committee. Efforts are underway to find a reasonable and mutually acceptable compromise to restrictive language that would deny Most Favored Nation status and Export-Import credits to the Soviet Union. I want to emphasize the importance I attach to the granting of Most Favored Nation status to the USSR. Careful attention should also be given to the importance of Title V concerning tariff preferences for developing countries and providing appropriate limits for Trade Adjustment Assistance. This legislation is close to enactment. It would be a tragedy not to pass it.

In the area of foreign policy, Congress should enact the *Export-Import Bank Authorization, Asian and African Development Bank Authorizations*, and the *Foreign Assistance Act*.

I know that a troublesome piece of legislation for me—and perhaps one of the most important for the Nation—is the Foreign Assistance Act. I am disturbed over the deep cuts in many essential and worthwhile programs which contribute to our overall efforts to attain peace and stability in the world. In addition, the bill contains several restrictions on the Executive which would reduce my ability to meet obligations to American security and that of our friends abroad. I respect and strongly support the role of Congress in the area of foreign policy. But under the Constitution, the Executive is the spokesman for the Nation and must have adequate freedom of action. I may recommend changes in our approach to foreign aid in the coming year and will propose realistic programs in the national interest. I strongly urge this Congress to continue the current programs unencumbered by amendments which prevent the effective implementation of policy.

There are several significant problems in the *State Department Authorization*. I have requested Secretary of State Kissinger to work with appropriate leaders in an effort to resolve these differences.

The *USIA Authorization* has been passed by both bodies and should be finally considered by a conference committee. The House version is preferred.

Both bodies have passed an extension of the *Defense Production Act*. I hope the differing versions will be reconciled and sent to me for signature.

To promote more effective management of the Government's approach to our national energy resources, the Administration recommended creation of an *Energy Research and Development Administration*. This key legislation has now passed both Houses and hopefully will soon be considered by a conference committee. In its consideration of this legislation, I recommend to the conference committee that the provision calling for an Energy Policy Council be deleted and several other undesirable provisions be revised in accordance with current discussions.

To increase the availability of clean natural gas through competitive pricing of newly developed gas supplies, I urge this Congress to enact the *Natural Gas Supply bill*. As we enter the winter months, our energy resources must be effectively utilized for the benefit of all Americans.

Volume 10—Number 37

1140

PRESIDENTIAL DOCUMENTS: HERALD K. FURZ, 1977

Gas deregulation which would increase supply is a vital part of the Administration's response to the energy shortage.

Of major importance to our ability to provide sufficient energy in the years ahead is a proposal for the Federal Government to grant permits for construction, licensing and operation of *Deepwater Ports* beyond the three-mile limit. The House has passed a bill. Hopefully, the Senate will also move forward on this key measure.

Among the many energy-related bills before Congress, is the important *Energy Tax Package*. This measure imposes a windfall profits tax on the selling price of domestic crude oil, eliminates the percentage depletion deduction for U.S. taxes on foreign production of oil and gas, and limits foreign tax credits available to U.S. oil and gas companies operating in foreign lands.

We learned from the recent oil embargo that we must be better prepared to reduce the impact of any future supply interruptions. At the time of the embargo our Naval petroleum reserves, set aside through the foresight of the Congress for the specific purpose of assuring adequate supplies of essential fuels, could not be used in time to contribute to our national defense requirements.

In a moment of need, oil in the ground is useless. We must have authority to produce and deliver our emergency petroleum reserves to the user. Presently, the *Navy Petroleum Reserves at Elk Hills*, California, have proven reserves of approximately one billion barrels. The *Navy Petroleum Reserves in Alaska*, although unexplored, have estimated reserves of up to 33 billion barrels. I intend to consult with the Congress on the best way to assure that the reserve capacities of these fields are in a state where they can contribute effectively to our national security in any future energy crisis.

The House and Senate conferees are now addressing the difficult issues involved in striking a balance between the environmental effects of surface coal mining under the proposed *Surface Mining Act* and the nation's need for coal as an essential source of energy. This issue has been under consideration throughout this Congress. It would greatly reduce the problem of opening new coal mines and increasing production if acceptable mined area legislation can be enacted. I am asking Secretary of the Interior Morton to continue discussions with legislative leaders in an effort to reach an agreement over troublesome provisions in this measure.

The *Illegal Aliens* legislation is necessary to establish clear guidelines regarding the law for employment of aliens who work in this country. The House has already passed a bill. I would hope the Senate could consider this measure during the fall term.

Real progress was made on the House floor when the Conference report on the *Veterans Education Bill* was substantially reduced in terms of Federal expenditures. I hope the Senate will now act in the same spirit. This can be done by reducing the benefit limit to the original Senate bill. It provided a substantial increase—18.2 percent. But cost-of-living increases for our veterans in school are necessary. I urge the Senate to reaffirm its original rate increase and send the bill to me so benefits can begin.

Volume 10—Number 37

1141

In May of 1973, the Administration proposed the *Job Security Assistance Act*. This measure is an important part of our policy to assist in a period of rising unemployment. It would modernize the unemployment compensation system without violating the relationship between the States and the Federal government.

I recognize the concern of many that unemployment might rise because of the policies we must follow to fight inflation.

I am watching the unemployment rate very closely. This Administration will act with compassion. We will not permit the burden of necessary economic restraint to fall on those members of society least able to bear the costs.

The unemployment rate in August, announced last Friday, was 5.4 percent. While we certainly cannot be complacent about any American lacking work, we are thankful that the number is not larger.

The present situation calls for full use of available tools and dollars.

I have asked Secretary of Labor Brennan to accelerate the obligation of currently available funds under the *Comprehensive Employment and Training Act*.

The Secretary will immediately disperse $65 million to those communities in which unemployment is highest. By the end of the month he will make available another $350 million under CETA Title II. This $415 million will finance some 85,000 public sector jobs in State and local governments. Added to the almost $550 million obligated for public service employment in June from the FY 1974 appropriation, and about $50 million in other funds, currently available resources will provide 170,000 public service jobs this coming winter. The effect of these actions will be to double the number of federally funded public service jobs. In addition, $1.3 billion will be available to State and local governments for manpower programs.

Beyond this, I have requested the Secretary of Labor, in consultation with my economic advisors, and drawing on the outcome of the Conference on Inflation, to develop contingency plans against the possibility of substantially increased unemployment. If future unemployment statistics demonstrate the need, we will be ready to present plans to the Congress and to work together to assure a mutually satisfactory course of action.

There are several health authorizations that require extension this year. They are the *Health Manpower Act*, *Health Services Act* and the *Health Resources Planning Act*. All are necessary but, unfortunately, each currently has objectionable features in program provisions and excessive authorizations. I have requested Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare Weinberger to cooperate fully with appropriate committees in an effort to enact reasonable legislation. I will continue to seek a sound compromise on the *Comprehensive Health Insurance Plan*.

The House recently passed the *Federal Mass Transportation Act*. While the funding was kept to a level which I can support, certain structural changes in that bill are necessary. I am asking Secretary of Transportation Brinegar to work closely with the Senate in an effort to develop an acceptable bill.

The Administration's proposal to improve the *regulatory climate in the surface transportation industry* is presently before the Congress. This bill, with certain modifications to ensure greater reliance on competitive market forces, would contribute substantially to the efficiency and

Volume 10—Number 37

vitality of this Nation's private sector transportation system. I urge the Congress to act promptly to complete its work on the important legislation.

The *Amtrak Authorization* legislation is now ready for Conference. Since major problems exist with the Senate version, I hope the Conference will adhere as closely as possible to the House measure and soon present it for my signature.

I assume the Congress will pass the *Military Construction Authorization bill*, including expansion of the support facility at Diego Garcia.

The *Export Administration Act* is ready for conference action and should be reported soon.

Legislation to restore financial integrity to the *Railroad Retirement system* has not been enacted by either House. I urge legislation be adopted to accomplish this objective without resorting to a subsidy from either the Social Security System or the general taxpayers.

Court congestion impairs fair and speedy trials. The Administration supports legislation to create new *Federal District Court Judgeships*. While this measure has been slow to move, I would hope Congress could expedite consideration in order to alleviate overcrowded court calendars.

A bill to renew my authority to submit *Executive Reorganization Plans* has been sent to the Congress. During the past 25 years all Presidents have used this authority to improve management in the executive branch. I would like my Administration also to be able to utilize this effective tool of good government. I urge prompt bipartisan consideration of this bill.

It is apparent that I have referred to some legislative matters and omitted reference to others. This is not an inventory of my total legislative concerns. I will send the traditional message to the Congress in January covering the broad spectrum of legislative programs. This will afford me an interim opportunity for detailed study and review.

The 93rd Congress, in which I am proud to have served, has an opportunity to join with the Executive Branch at this turning point of history. We can respond together in the constructive harmony that ought to exist between Republicans and Democrats, between Federal and local governments, between the Executive and Legislative branches, and between America and other nations. A momentous challenge confronts me as well as the 93rd Congress. Together, we can summon forth the reserves of energy, imagination, and devotion necessary to generate a new and proud era of American achievement. We cannot and will not fail the American people.

GERALD R. FORD

The White House,
September 12, 1974.

## Assistant to the President

*Announcement of Appointment of*
*William J. Baroody, Jr.*
*September 12, 1974*

The President today announced the appointment of William J. Baroody, Jr., as Assistant to the President. Mr. Baroody was Special Assistant to the President from

February 4, 1973, to January 30, 1974, and since then has been Special Consultant to the President. From June 6, 1973, to January 30, 1974, Mr. Baroody also served as Deputy to Counsellor to the President for Domestic Affairs Melvin R. Laird.

As Assistant to the President, Mr. Baroody will head the Office of Public Liaison. He will be responsible for providing liaison with major nongovernmental organiza-

Volume 10—Number 37

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

SEPTEMBER 10, 1974

OFFICE OF THE WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY

THE WHITE HOUSE

EXCHANGE OF REMARKS BETWEEN THE PRESIDENT
AND
PRIME MINISTER RABIN

THE SOUTH LAWN

3:10 P.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Prime Minister and Mrs. Rabin, it is a very real pleasure for me to have the opportunity of welcoming both of you to the United States.

You are returning as the leader of a great country. You are returning to meet many of your friends over the years that you knew so well during your service here as Ambassador to the United States.

I trust that you and Mrs. Rabin will thoroughly enjoy this visit back to the United States.

The United States, Mr. Prime Minister, has been proud of its association with the State of Israel. We are committed to Israel's survival and security.

The United States for a quarter of a century has had an excellent relationship with the State of Israel. We have cooperated in many, many fields -- in your security, in the well-being of the Middle East, and in leading what we all hope is a lasting peace throughout the world.

Many of our people have a close personal relationship and association with your citizens, your fellow citizens in Israel, and we hope and trust that this relationship will grow and expand.

Over the last few months, there has been movement in the Middle East for a lasting and durable peace. Israel has cooperated, Israel has been helpful, and we hope and trust that in the months ahead the foundation which has been laid will be built upon.

We want, you want, and others throughout the world want a lasting and durable peace in the Middle East.

MORE

The first steps have been taken. Others will follow, and I am certain and positive that, as we meet here during the next several days, we can contribute to the building of a better and finer peace in the Middle East.

I hope that you and Mrs. Rabin have a delightful and warm welcome, which you so richly deserve, in the United States.

PRIME MINISTER RABIN: Mr. President, Mrs. Ford, I am grateful to you for your kind invitation to come to Washington and for your warm words of welcome.

As you know, Mr. President, I am not a complete stranger in this country, nor, indeed, in this city. But this is the first time that I come here in my capacity of Prime Minister of Israel.

You, Mr. President, have very recently undertaken new and awesome responsibilities, and I feel certain, therefore, that you can appreciate the weighty load that rests on my shoulders.

I represent a country which is faced, which is facing manifold problems, great challenges, but also great and new opportunities for internal progress and for peace with her neighbors.

In the performance of my new duties, I am encouraged as all my predecessors have been, by their binding friendship and by the ever-deepening ties which bind the people of Israel with the people of this, the greatest democracy, and with its leaders.

Ever since the renewal of Jewish independence in the land of our forefathers, after long generations of suffering and martyrdom, Israel has enjoyed generous aid and support on the part of the United States. Our gratitude for this sustenance will be recorded forever in the annals of our people.

During all these times since 1948, Israel has seen periods of trial and hardships. Yet she never swerved, even for a moment, from her supreme national goal, which is the quest for peace with her Arab neighbors.

MORE

So far, to our nation's deep sorrow, this
goal has eluded us. Despite the recent test of arms,
Israel is prepared to seek progress towards peace.

We have in recent months demonstrated that
we have taken risks for peace to see whether new
efforts may possibly bring us nearer to this achievement.

I know in this quest for peace in our region,
we have in you, Mr. President, and in our colleagues
in the Government of the United States, a strong and
determined partner.

Indeed, you, Mr. President, pronounced the
commitment of the United States to the quest of world
peace as the central theme in your inaugural address
only a few weeks ago.

The people of Israel stand united in the
conviction that war is futile, that it cannot solve
problems, that only human suffering is brought in its wake.
As far as our part of the world is concerned, we are
convinced that there is no issue, however complicated
it may now appear, that it cannot be resolved by
patient negotiations.

What is needed is an equal measure of desire
and determination on all sides to achieve peace.

Much depends at this stage on what other
governments in the area are prepared to do. At any
rate, we in Israel are ready for the peace-making
effort.

I must, however, with a full sense of responsi-
bility, add this: As you, Mr. President, assumed high
office, you conveyed to your people and to the world
the message that a strong America is a powerful guarantee
for peace in the world. This is true in the same
measure as far as Israel and her own region are concerned.
Only a strong Israel, which has the capacity to deter
aggression and to defend ourselves successfully by our
own strength, has a chance of winning peace.

I cannot underline strongly enough our
conviction that the constant maintenance of Israel's
strength is an absolute prerequesite for the attainment
of solutions to the problems of our troubled region.

MORE

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

SEPTEMBER 10, 1974

SECRETARY

THE WHITE HOUSE

THE SOUTH LAWN

3:10 P.M. EDT

MORE

Page 2

MORE

Page 3

I must, however, with a full sense of responsibility, add this: As you, Mr. President, assumed high office, you conveyed to your people and to the world the message that a strong America is a powerful guarantee for peace in the world. This is true in the same measure as far as Israel and her own region are concerned. Only a strong Israel, which has the capacity to deter aggression and to defend ourselves successfully by our own strength, has a chance of winning peace.

MORE

VISIT OF PRIME MINISTER YITZHAK
RABIN OF ISRAEL

*Exchange of Remarks Between the President and the Prime Minister at the Welcoming Ceremony on the South Lawn.* September 10, 1974

THE PRESIDENT. *Mr. Prime Minister and Mrs. Rabin:*

It is a very real pleasure for me to have the opportunity of welcoming both of you to the United States.

The United States, Mr. Prime Minister, has been proud of its association with the State of Israel. We shall continue to stand with Israel. We are committed to Israel's survival and security.

The United States for a quarter of a century has had an excellent relationship with the State of Israel. We have cooperated in many, many fields—in your security, in the well-being of the Middle East, and in leading what we all hope is a lasting peace throughout the world.

Over the last few months, there has been movement in the Middle East for a lasting and durable peace. Israel has cooperated; Israel has been helpful. And we hope and trust that in the months ahead the foundation which has been laid will be built upon.

The first steps have been taken; others will follow. And I am certain and positive that, as we meet here during the next several days, we can contribute to the building of a better and finer peace in the Middle East.

THE PRIME MINISTER. *Mr. President, Mrs. Ford, I am grateful to you for your kind invitation to come to Washington and for your warm words of welcome.*

I represent a country which is faced—which is facing manifold problems, great challenges, but also great and new opportunities for internal progress and for peace with her neighbors.

In the performance of my new duties, I am encouraged, as all my predecessors have been, by their binding friendship and by the ever-deepening ties which bind the people of Israel with the people of this, the greatest democracy, and with its leaders.

Volume 10—Number 37

1131

During all these times since 1948, Israel has seen periods of trials and hardships. Yet she never swerved, even for a moment, from her supreme national goal, which is the quest for peace with her Arab neighbors.

So far, to our nation's deep sorrow, this goal has eluded us. Despite the recent test of arms, Israel is prepared to continue to seek progress towards peace.

We have in recent months demonstrated that we have taken risks for peace to see whether new efforts may possibly bring us nearer to its achievement.

I know, in this quest for peace in our region, we have in you, Mr. President, and in your colleagues in the Government of the United States, a strong and determined partner.

I must, however, with a full sense of responsibility, add this: As you, Mr. President, assumed high office you conveyed to your people and to the world the message that a strong America is a paramount guarantee for peace in the world. This is true in the same measure as far as Israel and her own region are concerned. Only a strong Israel which has the capacity to deter aggression and to defend herself successfully by her own strengths, has a chance of winning peace.

I cannot underline strongly enough our conviction that the constant maintenance of Israel's strength is an absolute prerequisite for the attainment of solutions to the problems of our troubled region.

On these and other matters of common interest and concern, I shall be exchanging views with you, Mr. President, and your colleagues, within the next few days. I look forward to doing so in the spirit of confidence and of the cultivation of a good future which has linked our governments and our people for so many years.

I am confident that I shall return to Jerusalem assured of the United States' determination to support the well-being of Israel within a Middle East that we hope that will finally be advancing on the road towards a just and durable peace which assures security and progress for all its people.

Thank you very much.

NOTE: The President spoke at 3:10 p.m. on the South Lawn at the White House where Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin was given a formal welcome with full military honors.

1144

Canada, signed at Washington on December 3, 1971, as amended by an exchange of notes of June 28 and July 9, 1974.

The Treaty is one of a current series of extradition treaties being negotiated by the United States and contains provisions regarding extradition for the offenses of aircraft hijacking, narcotics and conspiracy to commit listed offenses.

The Treaty will facilitate the mutual efforts of the United States and Canada in combating international crime. In addition, modernization of the extradition relations between the United States and Canada is especially important in light of the ease of travel between the two countries. I recommend that the Senate give early and favorable consideration to the Treaty as amended and give its advice and consent to ratification.

GERALD R. FORD

## Citizenship Day and Constitution Week, 1974

Proclamation 4312. September 12, 1974.

By the President of the United States of America a Proclamation

As we near our Nation's two hundredth anniversary, let all of us, as equal partners in a Nation of justice under law, resolve to work, with all our strength and common sense, to achieve "... a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity. ..." Through such a rededication to the spirit and principles of the Constitution we can build a better future for every individual American, and a better America for all.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, GERALD R. FORD, President of the United States of America, in compliance with the joint resolutions of the Congress of the United States, call upon appropriate Government officials to display the flag of the United States on all Government buildings on Citizenship Day, September 17, 1974—the 187th anniversary of the signing of the Constitution. I urge Federal, State, and local officials, as well as leaders of civic, educational and religious organizations to conduct appropriate ceremonies and programs on that day.

I also designate as Constitution Week the period beginning September 17 and ending September 23, 1974, and urge all Americans to observe that week with appropriate ceremonies and activities in their schools, churches and in

other suitable places in order to foster a better understanding of the Constitution, and of the rights and responsibilities of United States citizens.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twelfth day of September, in the year of our Lord nineteen hundred and seventy-four, and of the Independence of the United States of America the one hundred and ninety-ninth.

GERALD R. FORD

[Filed with the Office of the Federal Register, 10:13 a.m., September 13, 1974]

## Visit of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin of Israel

Exchange of Toasts Between the President and Prime Minister Rabin at a Dinner Honoring the Israeli Prime Minister. September 12, 1974

THE PRESIDENT. Mr. Prime Minister, Mrs. Rabin, and honored guests:

It is a great privilege and honor for Mrs. Ford and myself to be host to the two of you on this occasion and to warmly welcome you back to the United States in this capacity as the Prime Minister of your great country.

But I would also like to extend our warm welcome for all of your friends who are here and the many, many friends throughout the whole United States who are also good and firm friends of the two of you and to extend to you, representing your country, the depth and the warmth of the feeling that we in the United States have for Israel.

As I was sitting here chatting with you and talking to Mrs. Rabin, I couldn't help but note that 1948 was a somewhat significant year as far as your country is concerned, and it just happened that it was quite a year as far as the Fords were concerned. It was the year that we were married—

MRS. RABIN. And the Rabins.

THE PRESIDENT. Oh! [Laughter]—and the year that I got elected to Congress but, more importantly, certainly, the year that Israel gained its independence.

And I am pleased to note that our country was the first of all countries in the world at that time to recognize Israel. And we were proud to do it then, and we are proud that it was done by America at that time.

It is especially nice to have the opportunity of meeting with you yesterday, and today, and tonight, tomorrow, a person who is a soldier, a diplomat, and a political leader, and to know that you represent your country so effectively and so well.

The American people have a great deal of understanding and sympathy and dedication to the same kind of

Volume 10—Number 37

1145

ideals that are representative of Israel. And, therefore, I think we in America have a certain rapport and understanding with the people of Israel.

We, as two nations who believe in peace, have sought by joint action in conjunction with others a durable and stable peace in the Middle East which I think all of us agree is in the best interest of your country and the Middle East—the world as a whole.

We, as a country, are proud to be associated with Israel in this mutual effort to move and to continue to move in the direction of an even better, more stable, and more equitable peace in the Middle East.

I can't tell you how pleased that we are to have the opportunity of expressing our gratitude for all of the things that our countries have done together and all of the things that I hope that our two countries can continue to do in the future.

We have mutual aims and objectives. We have a friendship that is durable and growing. We have the kind of relationship that I think, if expanded worldwide, would be beneficial to all mankind.

And so if I may, Mr. Prime Minister, I would like to ask all of our guests here tonight to stand and to offer a toast to your President, and to you and Mrs. Rabin.

To the President.

THE PRIME MINISTER. *Mr. President, Mrs. Ford, distinguished guests:*

In the name of my wife and myself, I would like to thank you very much for inviting us and taking care of us during our visit here.

I remember, Mr. President, meeting you while you were the minority leader in the House. I had many talks then with you; I learned very much to admire you. And I know that by assuming the responsibilities of the President of the United States, you have taken upon yourself tremendous—tremendous role not only for this country. But I believe that the President of the United States is the leader of the free world and has to bear in mind, if you would allow me to say so, not only the well-being of this country but the well-being of all countries that strive for freedom, for democracy, because in the world that we live today, it is not always possible to a small country to do it against odds.

The relations between the United States and Israel started many years ago. When our country was reborn we faced many problems. The first one was the absorption of many newcomers, immigrants, the remnants of the holocaust of Europe, the Second World War, the refugees that came from the Arab countries. I believe that we were a country that half of its population were refugees.

And then the United States offered Israel economic aid, technical aid, that made it possible to us to absorb these people, our brothers, in a way that the transformation from refugees to be part of our creative society was very much facilitated by your help.

During the years other problems appeared. The threat from outside became more apparent, and the United States added also military aid in terms of supplying us arms to be able to defend ourselves by ourselves.

I think that 26 years from 1948 have proved that your support to us was used in the best way for the well-being of our people and for preservation of a democracy and the free country in that part of the world.

And I would like to thank you and to thank everybody in this country that has made it possible till today.

I don't know, Mr. President, if you have seen it. I have given a small present to you. It is a sculpture, a sculpture that describes the struggle between David and Goliath. I believe it is not only a story from the Bible, it is a story that started then and continues on till the present days.

And if there is something that symbolizes Israel today, it is the spirit of David facing Goliath. And the meaning of the spirit is, on the one hand, to seek peace, to believe in peace. We are a Jewish state, and we believe that part of being a Jew means to seek peace, to search peace, but on the other hand, to realize that peace is attainable only for those who are ready to take risks to dare to withstand Goliaths.

I believe that this is what is significant to Israel today, the spirit of David seeking peace and, at the same time, being ready and capable to meet some Goliaths.

I hope and I believe, Mr. President, that under your leadership the relations between our two countries will continue, will be strengthened in the unique spirit that was so significant till today, the search of peace and the understanding that strength helps to achieve peace.

Allow me, Mr. President, to raise my glass to the President of the United States.

THE PRESIDENT. Thank you very much.

NOTE: The President spoke at 9:58 p.m. in the State Dining Room at the White House.

## Radio and Television Directors' Association

*The President's Filmed Remarks to the Association's Conference in Montreal, Canada. September 13, 1974*

I would very much rather be giving you this greeting in person than on film. It has been far too long since I have had a chance to meet with you and your organization.

I well remember that 1968 conference in Los Angeles when you asked me to discuss the legislative plans of the newly elected Republican Administration. A lot has happened since then.

And unpredictable as the future can be, I can tell you one thing for sure about my new job. To the very best

Volume 10—Number 37

of my ability to make it so, this will be an open Adminis-
tration, and that means open to all newsmen.

You and your organization can perform a very vital
service for those of us in Government through your ques-
tions and your reports.

We get a wealth of information fed back to us about
what people are thinking, what their concerns are, and
their hopes and aspirations. And this is even more im-
portant to me as President than it has been in the past.

The members of your organization know so well the
communities and the people they serve. Over the years
I was able to pay particular attention to the work of two
of your members, the late Dick Cheverton at WOTV,
and that of Jack Hogan at WZZM-TV, both stations in
Grand Rapids, Michigan.

Their work and their involvement in the community
problems and projects provide eloquent testimony to the
dedication of your members.

I believe the news media's concern with community
affairs is vitally important. Half jokingly, I have urged
Washington correspondents to go back to their home-
towns occasionally, for 6 months or so each year, to get
reacquainted with what the people are thinking and
doing.

By the same token, I suggest it might be profitable for
you who work outside Washington to spend a few months
in our Capital every so often. We all would benefit from
such an exchange of ideas, attitudes, and experiences.

As you may know, most of our White House press staff
are experienced journalists. One of them, Bill Roberts,
served as president of your organization. I know that to
the best of their abilities they will do what they can to
help you.

And while some people say that Government and the
news media are in a sense adversaries, I hope we can
always remain friendly adversaries.

I trust your conference will prove stimulating and pro-
fessionally helpful. I congratulate your president, Tom
Frawley, on completion of a successful year, and wish
your new president and officers well in meeting and
surmounting the challenges and the concerns of the
broadcast journalists.

Thank you very much.

NOTE: The remarks were filmed for use at the conference on
Friday, September 13, 1974.

Digest of Other
White House Announcements

Following is a listing of items of general interest which
were announced to the press during the period covered
by this issue but which are not carried elsewhere in the
issue. Appointments requiring Senate approval are not

included since they appear in the list of nominations submitted to the Senate, below.

September 7

The President met at the White House with American astronauts and Soviet cosmonauts who will make up the crew of the joint Apollo-Soyuz mission in 1975. The crew members were accompanied by Soviet Ambassador A. F. Dobrynin.

September 9

During his visit to Pittsburgh, the President stopped
at a school complex in Moon Township to greet students
and faculty members.

The President met with Kurt Waldheim, Secretary
General of the United Nations, and F. Bradford Morse,
Under Secretary General for Political and General As-
sembly Affairs.

At the invitation of the Government of Japan, the
President will visit Japan for 3 days beginning Novem-
ber 19, 1974.

September 10 - Rabin arrival & mtg.

Former Prime Minister Edward Heath of the United
Kingdom met with the President at the White House.

September 12 - Rabin mtg.

The President today accepted with deep regret the
resignation of Henry B. Turner as Assistant Secretary of
Commerce for Administration, effective September 20,
1974.

The President today accepted, with regret and with
appreciation for his contributions in the area of arms
control, the resignation of Robert H. Miller as Assistant
Director of the United States Arms Control and Disarma-
ment Agency.

The President today accepted with regret the resigna-
tion of George E. Johnson as a Governor of the United
States Postal Service.

The President today acknowledged the retirement from
active service of Martin Pence as Chief Judge of the
United States District Court for the District of Hawaii,
effective November 19, 1974.

The President today accepted the resignation of Ken-
eth A. Guenther as Alternate U.S. Executive Director of
the Inter-American Development Bank, effective Au-
gust 31, 1974. The President expressed his appreciation
for Mr. Guenther's contributions to the work of the Bank.

September 13

A group of black mayors and black Republican leaders
met with the President at the White House.

Gov. Winfield Dunn, of Tennessee, chairman of the
Republican Governors Association, met with the Presi-
dent to discuss fall gubernatorial campaigns.

Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin met with the
President to conclude 3 days of meetings.

Volume 10—Number 37

September 12, 1974

NOTICE TO THE PRESS

The President and Prime Minister Rabin met for an hour and 15 minutes in the Oval Office this morning. Today's meeting involved a general discussion and included the on-going U.S. military supply relationship with Israel. The President reaffirmed the continuation of this on-going relationship.

The President and the Prime Minister will meet again tomorrow to complete their discussions.

#

#

#

This Copy For

NEWS CONFERENCE

#28

AT THE WHITE HOUSE
WITH JACK HUSHEN

AT 11:54 A.M. EDT

SEPTEMBER 13, 1974

FRIDAY

MR. HUSHEN: Good morning.

We have posted the President's schedule for
today.

This morning, he met with a number of staff
members, including General Haig, Secretary Kissinger,
General Scowcroft, Bob Hartmann and myself.

Q All separately?

MR. HUSHEN: No, General Scowcroft was, I
believe, in with Secretary Kissinger, and Bob Hartmann
and I were in together.

At about 10:45, as you know, the President
dropped in to the meeting in the Cabinet Room of the
black Republican leaders from throughout the Nation.
A list of those attending that session has been posted.
The President asked Stan Scott, who is Special Assistant
to the President and who serves as liaison with minority
groups, to arrange this and other similar meetings to
provide the President an opportunity to hear the views
of these individuals on problems facing black Americans
and their proposed solutions.

In that regard, the President has asked these
individuals to provide their ideas to him in writing through
Stan Scott.

We hope to have two members of that group come
up here and brief you when I conclude.

At noon today, as you know, Prime Minister
Rabin will be meeting with the President and Secretary
Kissinger. We expect to have a report on that meeting
when it concludes.

In addition to that, we are going to have open
coverage of his departure by car from the South Lawn.
We will arrange that at the proper time.

MORE

#28

- 21 -

28

MR. HUSHEN: I did not. But I would again say
what I said to you yesterday, that the State Department
is adequately equipped to handle those questions.

Q This is a major policy question on
what the CIA does in terms of foreign governments. It
is not the State Department. The President makes the
foreign policy so I think the question is legitimate here.

MR. HUSHEN: All right.

Q In addition to that, there has now been
raised the question of perjury on the part of Administra-
tion officials who have testified before Congressional
committees about Chile and denied that there was any
intervention in the affairs of the Chilean government.

Now it rises to the level of Presidential
concern as to whether people in the Administration
have told the truth and will tell the truth in the future.
So I wish you could get some response from the President
about that.

MR. HUSHEN: All right, I will make an attempt.

THE PRESS: Thank you, Jack.

END

(AT 12:35 P.M. EDT)

* * *

1:31 P.M. EDT

MR. HUSHEN: I can give you a brief report now
that the meeting with President Ford and the Israeli
Prime Minister is concluded.

As you know, the meeting was in the Oval Office.
It lasted approximately 30 minutes.

In addition to the President and Mr. Rabin,
those attending for the American side were Secretary
of State Kissinger, and General Brent Scowcroft, and
our Ambassador to Israel, Ken Keating.

On the Israeli side, their Ambassador Dinitz
and the Director General of the Prime Minister's Office,
Mordechai Gazit.

As you know, the President and the Prime
Minister met for 40 minutes on Tuesday and then again
yesterday for an hour and 15 minutes, so they spent
quite a bit of time together.

MORE

#28

- 22 -

#28

In the meeting today, they again discussed
in depth the issues involved in shaping the course
of negotiations over the next few months, and to
review bilateral relations between our two countries.

The President was pleased to become
reacquainted with Prime Minister Rabin and the talks
were described as friendly and useful to both sides.

Both leaders reaffirmed the importance of
maintaining the momentum of negotiations on a genuine
peace settlement in the Middle East. And they made
progress in moving toward an understanding of how these
negotiations might proceed.

The President reaffirmed the long-standing
friendship for Israel and also reaffirmed the continuing
U.S. support for the security and well-being of that
country. The President welcomed the increasing
commercial contacts between the United States and Israel
in keeping with the close ties between the two countries.

The President and the Prime Minister reviewed
the ongoing U.S. military supply relationship and the
President reaffirmed the continuity of that relationship.

That is the end of our statement.

I might be able to give you a little more help,
but we can't go too much beyond that.

Q Can we start with the last sentence; what
does that actually mean?

MR. HUSHEN: Well, it means what it says.

Q What does it say?

Q Does that mean he is going to continue
to supply arms at the present levels that have existed
in the past without any change?

MR. HUSHEN: Well, all I can say is that it is
an ongoing relationship. I can't enlighten you as to
whether or not there is going to be any changes.

Q Jack, can you translate it in terms of
dollars or military hardware?

MR. HUSHEN: I cannot.

MORE

#28

- 23 -

#28

Q Can you say whether it has increased from
like four days ago when Rabin was not here?

MR. HUSHEN: I cannot. As you probably all
know, he has a press conference scheduled for 2:30 this
afternoon.

Q What is this progress in negotiations,
progress in understanding on how negotiations will proceed?
Does that mean that the President and the Prime Minister
decided on who Israel should negotiate with next on
withdrawal of Israel forces from Arab lands?

MR. HUSHEN: Would you restate that?

Q You spoke of they made progress in moving
toward an understanding on how the negotiations may
proceed. I am asking, are you speaking of negotiations
on the possibility of further withdrawal of Israeli
forces from Arab countries.

MR. HUSHEN: I can't get into that specifically,
but the next step would be consultations with other
parties in the Middle East dispute to resume and, Secretary
of State Kissinger will continue these consultations when
he meets with the Arab Foreign Ministers at the United
Nations General Assembly later this month.

Q Jack, did the President or Secretary of
State have any objections to Israel having its negotiations
with Egypt about withdrawal in the Sinai Desert?

MR. HUSHEN: I can't give you any help there.

Q Jack, you said the negotiations were
described as friendly and useful to both sides. Who
made that description?

MR. HUSHEN: That was the consensus of the
participants.

Q Should we consider this a joint statement
or is this purely a statement from our own Government?

MR. HUSHEN: From our own Government.

Q Will there be a joint communique?

MR. HUSHEN: No.

Q Why not?

MORE

#28

- 25 -

#28

Q When was the decision made not to issue
a communique -- today, yesterday?

MR. HUSHEN: I presume it was made today.

Q Jack, were there any discussions of
whether the Secretary is going to the Middle East in
October, late October, or so, to continue discussions?

MR. HUSHEN: I don't know. I would refer
that question over to the Secretary of State.

Q Could we ask -- maybe Les can answer this --
when you referred to the progress in moving toward an
understanding of how these negotiations -- are you speaking
of the peace conference, are you speaking of the bilateral
negotiations, like one-on-one, Israel with one Arab
country? What are we talking about, Jack?

MR. HUSHEN: I can't give you any detail, Helen.

Q Why? The understanding on what negotiation?

MR. JANKA: The negotiations that have been
going on, the same way, the consultations that have been
going on all summer long and the ones that will proceed
in the future.

Q Can you tell us what the progress was?
Was any progress made toward a meeting of minds that you
read in the statement? What is the progress? Was there
any progress in moving towards an understanding?

MR. HUSHEN: I can't go beyond that statement.

Q Can you tell us where the talks broke down?

MR. HUSHEN: No, nor could I even say that they
did.

Q Jack, as a matter of principle, don't you
think it would be more useful in the future on foreign
affairs matters if we had a briefing from somebody who
really was familiar with the subjects? It is nothing
personal against you.

MR. HUSHEN: I understand that. It is just a
decision on how far we are going to go into something.

Q No, it is not that. The guy who would
give the briefing would at least know the obvious.
Again, it is nothing personal against you, but a briefing
on this basis is almost misleading in part.

MORE

#28

It is now law. It is about halfway through. Approximately $16 billion of Federal money has gone back to States and local units of government so that they can establish at the local or State level that priorities that vary from New York to California, or Michigan to Florida, or communities in one State or another, have totally different problems.

And this vast amount of Federal money going without restriction for decisionmaking at the local and State level, I think, is a great achievement for a Republican Administration. And this Administration is going to continue it.

We want the legislation extended so that this effort will get even stronger in the months ahead.

So, I think we can take credit as Republicans for a program that is very meaningful and very substantial. But there are other things that have to be done, and they involve the area of foreign policy.

I always said and I believed then that America and the world was fortunate to have a great statesman in Henry Kissinger as our Secretary of State. And I have learned to an even greater degree how effective, how able, what a great teammate he is as he and I work on the problems involving peace throughout the world.

We have peace at the present time. We have peace for several reasons. One, we have peace because the United States is strong militarily. And we are not going to weaken our national security, despite the pressure from some sources.

Peace is related to strength. Weakness inevitably brings on war. History tells us that story.

In the interim while we are keeping strong, we are going to make conscientious efforts to negotiate with the Soviet Union, broadening our détente, seeking to make our total effort one of negotiation, not necessarily confrontation.

We are going to be working intimately with the problems of the Middle East, trying to move forward the successful efforts of disengagement which took place last fall.

We will concentrate in seeking to obtain a just and durable peace in that very difficult area of the world, but that is not the only area where we must concentrate. The Pacific, where over a period of about 10 years almost 60,000 Americans lost their lives—that was a great sacrifice, a sacrifice for an objective that many Administrations, not just one, felt was in the best interests of the United States and the world at large.

We cannot afford to throw away the sacrifices of those people. So, we must maintain our own strength and help our allies who are trying to retain the gains that were made in Vietnam and elsewhere in the Pacific.

We have the problem of Western Europe. The key to peace in the minds of many is the strengthening of NATO. We are working to keep better cooperation, stronger military and economic policies moving ahead.

I am encouraged, and we are going to be meeting from time to time, Secretary Kissinger and others, with those who can have a meaningful impact on the NATO or-

ganization, keeping it strong militarily, economically, diplomatically, and otherwise.

When you look at the other areas—Latin America, we are not going to neglect Latin America. We are going to work for greater cooperation there, and the activities of Dr. Kissinger in this area in the last 5 or 6 months have been significant.

We are not going to neglect Africa. We have and we will continue to work with those nations in that area of the world.

So anyplace you go, our broad policy of global peace will get our first and top attention because if we are going to keep peace, we can solve more easily our problems at home.

As I close, let me just thank all of you for the wonderful job you did in endorsing Mary Louise and Dick. Let me thank George for his tireless efforts, effective ones, and let me thank the Republican leadership in the House, Hugh Scott, John Rhodes, and their associates, and let me express to my staff that have been so helpful to me that I am grateful, and we are moving, and we are going to move with the Republican workers throughout the country. It is vital for us to carry our banner high, because I think we can do a great job for the country as a whole.

Thank you very kindly.

NOTE: The President spoke at 12:13 p.m. at the Mayflower Hotel. Earlier in the day, the President had held a breakfast meeting with members of the nominating committee of the Republican National Committee at the White House.

Prior to the luncheon, members of the Republican National Committee had elected Mary Louise Smith of Iowa as Republican National Chairman and Mrs. Smith had appointed Richard D. Obenshain of Virginia as Cochairman.

## THE PRESIDENT'S NEWS CONFERENCE OF SEPTEMBER 16, 1974

THE PRESIDENT. Ladies and gentlemen, this press conference is being held at a time when many Americans are observing the Jewish religious New Year. It begins a period of self-examination and reconciliation. In opening this press conference, I am mindful that the spirit of this holy day has a meaning for all Americans.

In examining one's deeds of the last year and in assuming responsibility for past actions and personal decisions, one can reach a point of growth and change. The purpose of looking back is to go forward with a new and enlightened dedication to our highest values.

The record of the past year does not have to be endlessly relived, but can be transformed by commitment to new insights and new actions in the year to come.

Ladies and gentlemen, I am ready for your questions. Mr. Cormier [Frank Cormier, Associated Press].

Volume 10—Number 38