Western Europe, p. 2 Asia, Latin America, p. 12 China, p. 18

PRESIDENT'S DEPARTURE FOR PEKING

Summary

The departure yesterday of President Nixon's party for Peking drew prominent to
top news coverage in media in many countries.

Italy's _La Stampa_ of Turin headlined, "Nixon Off for China 'In Peace for All Mankind.'" Japanese television carried satellite-transmitted scenes of the ceremony on the White House lawn and the take-off from Andrews Air Force Base.

Much reporting emphasized the mood of public approval surrounding the start of the trip. A West German TV correspondent said, "The President can count on the support of the majority of his people for this great task."

The feeling that important developments were in store in spite of Mr. Nixon's low-key approach was unmistakable in most treatment. The _Times_ of London asserted that "the gain to world peace from Mr. Nixon's visit should be immense."

Andre Malraux's press conference remarks on Tuesday about possible U.S. aid to China drew limited comment. _Le Soir_ of Brussels maintained that "contrary to what Mr. Malraux believes," Chinese attitudes "probably will remain basically incompatible with American methods." _Sing Pao_ of Hong Kong doubted that Peking would ask for U.S. assistance in the belief that it would bring Soviet criticism and damage China's prestige.

Japanese and South Korean media gave major play to the announcement that Assistant Secretary Green will visit Asian countries following the Peking trip. Tokyo media cited this as an indication that the U.S. will live up to the San Clemente commitment to keep Japan informed of China developments.

Peking media did not mention the President's departure, but reference to his China visit appeared today in a long NCNA article on last week's foreign policy message. It said that "referring to China, the U.S. President openly asserted that she is the 'dedicated opponent' of U.S. imperialism. This means that U.S. imperialism has no wish to change its hostile position toward China."

* * *

No. 23

1

2/18/72

## Paris TV Reporting

The departure from Washington was the lead item on French television's first network last night. A ten-minute film report touched aspects of the China visit ranging from the possibility of U.S. aid to China to the cooking facilities on Air Force One. A Washington commentator said no immediate results could be expected, as Mr. Nixon could not give the impression he is sacrificing his allies.

### "He Has Made China Respectable"

The main headlines of yesterday afternoon's elite independent *Le Monde* read, "President Nixon Departs for China Supported By the Majority of His Compatriots. Washington: The Mao Regime Has Become Respectable. Peking: To Isolate the Principal Enemy." Jacques Amalric reported from Washington:

> "Notwithstanding the precautions of his public statements, it is obvious that Mr. Nixon will have to come back from Peking with a few concrete results if he does not want to disappoint public opinion....

> "Yet Mr. Nixon has already achieved a considerable result: He has managed to make China respectable for American public opinion, this very China he still denounced on every possible occasion a few years ago. Yet the new sympathy-- very romantic, as is always the case with Americans--is somewhat ambiguous. This is why the President is now obliged to feed it."

In the same issue, contributor Claude Julien, just back from China, stressed that the major concern of the Chinese leaders is to break the encirclement of their country, "the oft-denounced 'American-Soviet collusion,'" He wrote:

> "If Mr. Nixon... really intends to proceed with progressive disengagement of his forces from Asia, a few links of the chain around China will slacken.... Several fully qualified Chinese leaders told me their objective is really to obtain such a withdrawal. They admit that this is no easy task for Mr. Nixon; the U.S. has solemnly pledged to aid many countries militarily, and it cannot abandon them.... But, they say in Peking, China has no aggressive intentions; it concentrates its efforts on its domestic development. Thus its neighbors have nothing to fear....

No. 23

2

2/18/72

"They admit Mr. Nixon has legitimate electoral preoccupations. Let him withdraw his troops progressively. He has time--the Chinese are patient... but they remain firm on the objective to be reached."

The writer said this patience has been rewarding in that China "has already obtained what it wanted concerning Taiwan, Mr. Kissinger having declared that the problem must be settled... between Taipei and Peking."

"The theories of 'two Chinas' and 'one China, one Taiwan' are dead.... On the level of principle, Taiwan is virtually back in the bosom of China."

"Expect Decisive Discussion of Vietnam"

Left-of-center *Combat* of Paris today judged that "everything gives reason to believe that all interested parties expect a decisive conversation on Indochina" in the talks and said "several reasons support this thesis."

"First, it is unthinkable that the two statesmen could gloss over such a problem; second, China appears to be taking the American withdrawal much more seriously than North Vietnam..."

"For the Chinese, this is the time for obtaining further concessions from Nixon--he needs reelection. Next year, if he is in office for four more years, he will show himself much more uncompromising."

Roland Faure commented in yesterday's moderate-right *Aurore* of Paris that the Vietnam conflict "has so adversely affected the past ten years" of American life that the U.S. "not only intends to finish with it very rapidly but categorically refuses to let itself be dragged into a comparable venture anywhere if its own security is not imperiled. This postulate will certainly contribute to easing the atmosphere at the Sino-American summit."

Financial *Les Echos* yesterday declared that "in announcing that they refuse to resume the Paris Vietnam talks today, the Americans and South Vietnamese appear to confirm the American intention to freeze the conference for the duration of Mr. Nixon's conversations in Peking."

No. 23

3

2/18/72

"It looks very much as if the U.S. President wants to avoid the risk of having his game with the Chinese spoiled by some initiative from Hanoi and the PRG on Avenue Kleber."

## "De Gaulle Showed the Way"

Gaullist La Nation of Paris asserted yesterday:

"When General de Gaulle ostentatiously recognized the Mao regime in 1964, the Americans considered it bad manners toward them. It is clear today that the great precursor, far from being hostile to them, traced out the way to be followed."

## West German TV: Filmed Reports

The departure was the leading news event in today's West German papers and on television last night.

Both TV networks showed film clips of the departure period. Their Washington correspondents stressed President Nixon's warning against excessive expectations.

## "He Can Count on Majority Support"

A first network correspondent said Mr. Nixon "wants to base his policy on undeniable geographical and political facts. The main objective for Nixon is not the election campaign, but building a new peaceful order in Asia to which the U.S. is willing to contribute in the future."

A TV newscast late yesterday presented a special five-minute report on Sino-American relations from World War II through Mr. Kissinger's visits. It stressed "historically close ties" between China and the U.S.

In a commentary on TV, Theo Sommer, a former Defense Ministry executive, saw in the meeting of Mr. Nixon and Chairman Mao evidence that the U.S. and China were pursuing policies based on national interest and abandoning policies based on ideology. He judged that "the center of world politics and the main areas of crisis" were moving from Europe to Asia and said Europeans "should be happy about that."

No. 23

4

2/18/72

"A Live Show in Color"

The Washington correspondent of the second network said that "the big TV show for the American public started live and in bright color.... The psychological investment couldn't be greater if this were a voyage to the moon...."

"All manner of rumors fill the Washington air. Malraux talked about a Marshall Plan for China. A news agency predicted an Asian conference on peace in Indochina. But meanwhile the bombs are still falling on Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam. This cannot produce a good feeling in the Communist hosts. If their silence is a contribution to the success of the trip, they will soon state their political price."

"No Nation Remains Unaffected"

Pro-Christian Democratic Rheinische Post of Duesseldorf declared that "no nation, hostile or friendly, can remain unaffected by the trip."

"Whether hopes or fears will come true is not decisive. After this visit, the world will appear in a different light.... Removing the blinders from his country's eyes, Nixon has enabled it to see the realities of China."

"Impact Felt Already"

The Washington correspondent of prestigious weekly Die Zeit of Hamburg wrote yesterday:

"We do not know whether Nixon will return with anything more than a communique pleasing to the ear.... Even if no concrete results are achieved, the impact of this trip has already made itself felt--Moscow woos Japan more than ever before; Japan is planning to build a bridge to Peking; India leans on the Soviet Union; North Vietnam is fearful of a deal at its expense; America's influence in Asia fluctuates; China's influence is consolidating. Nixon's visit is a catalyst speeding long dammed up historically necessary processes."

No. 23

5

2/18/72

## West Berlin: "Pragmatism Is the Principle"

Independent B.Z. of West Berlin said the visit indicated that "pragmatism will be the primary principle" in future Sino-American relations, concluding:

> "To the one party, pragmatism means how can the world be made Communist without endangering peace. And to the other, it is how can the world be kept free of Communism without being blown up. Such peace means ice-cold calculation in balancing and utilizing power and assets. Such peace means keeping free of the murderous illusion that the eternal spring-time of the nations has begun. And peace of this kind means embittered competition of systems."

## London: "A Welcome Piece of Trail-Blazing"

Today's left-oriented, mass-circulation London Daily Mirror asserted that "however cordial the talks in Peking, the immediate results are unlikely to be very dramatic."

> "All this doesn't matter very much. What does matter is that contact has been made where there was not contact."

> "China and America may not be buddies yet or anything like it. But they are no longer glaring at each other across a barrier of mutual incomprehension and misunderstanding."

> "The Peking get-together is a very welcome piece of trail-blazing."

The left-of-center London Sun said today that "though there are many obstacles, the fact that the President is on his way casts a ray of hope. Now, perhaps, despite Mr. Nixon's caution and the warnings of his military leaders, the first steps towards dispelling the mystery and fear of the bamboo curtain may be taken."

## "Europe Could Be a Beneficiary"

The influential independent weekly Economist, out today, wrote:

> "The importance of next week's meeting is that it could be the beginning of a major realignment between today's three great movers of events; and that a still largely passive Europe could be one of the beneficiaries of what happens..."

No. 23

6

2/18/72

The weekly stated that the Americans "want Chou En-lai to recognize that the growth of Soviet power in Asia is so much the biggest problem for China that he will be prepared to tolerate a limited American sphere of influence in Southeast Asia. Possibly the Chinese are already beginning to see things this way..."

A Chinese-American understanding could benefit Japan, it said, and "the Europeans stand to gain... from what the sight of Mr. Nixon and Mr. Chou getting friendly with one another may do to Soviet policy in Europe itself.

"For the past half-dozen years, the Russians have been simultaneously engaged in a policy of expansion in Asia and of sitting tight on their half of Europe. It has stretched their army and it has imposed an additional strain on their already very inefficient economy.

"If Mr. Nixon's trip helps to reinforce the Chinese in their opposition to Russian policy in Asia, Mr. Brezhnev will have to decide how long his country can afford to bear this strain.... The result may be a Russia more willing to look for an accommodation with Western Europe on the Europeans' terms, rather than its own."

## "Gain From Visit Should Be Immense"

The independent *Times* of London commented today that "if one recalls even the moments from the past at which nuclear war seemed a possibility--and always because of the existence of a Communist China--the gain to world peace from Mr. Nixon's visit should be immense...."

"What the visit may do--and, again, it is Mr. Nixon's wide-ranging foreign policy report that holds out the hope of it--is to assist China's emergence into world councils both by diminishing China's fears of America and in some ways balancing Chinese animosities towards Russia."

The paper maintained that "in attempting this Mr. Nixon has set himself a difficult task, considering his commitments in so many parts of the world, his Japanese allies, above all his visit to Moscow in May."

No. 23

7

2/18/72

"It would be a happy outcome of a long period of fruitless and damaging containment if America were also to take the lead in encouraging China to find the world rather more malleable and rather a less black-and-white place than the Chairman has seen it from an isolated Peking."

Today's liberal *Guardian* of Manchester and London said, "Mr. Nixon is much too cautious a politician to risk coming away totally empty-handed, so that perhaps the most interesting unresolved questions are America's future position over Formosa and what, if any, influence Peking is prepared to bring on Hanoi to seek a negotiated settlement in Indochina. The question of long-term economic aid is also likely to arise."

"Who Can Object to Understanding?"

The conservative London *Daily Telegraph* observed yesterday that "notwithstanding continuing Chinese attacks on America's policy in Vietnam, the indications are that both sides mean business," and continued:

"Mr. Nixon wisely sets his expectations in China in a low key, especially in view of his visit to Moscow in May for crucial negotiations on missile limitations, the Middle East and other subjects. He wants to be able to indicate to the Kremlin that he has achieved with China a loose but felicitous understanding which is wholly in the interest of world peace--and who can openly object to that?"

"This New Diplomacy Creates Problems"

The independent London *Financial Times* said yesterday that Mr. Nixon's Peking trip "has captured the public imagination like no other summit in recent history," although "the likelihood is still that...it will produce few immediate concrete results, whatever its longer-term implications."

The paper stated that it was "difficult to believe that either side could offer substantial concessions to the other at the moment" and that "the Peking trip could well be followed by an anti-climatic period in which little happens."
It continued:

No. 23

8

2/18/72

"This new view of diplomacy has created some serious problems for both the U.S. and its allies to think about. In the first place the White House belief that the regular bureaucracy cannot be relied upon to carry out a major shift in policy has concentrated power in the Executive's hands to a degree unparalleled in recent history. One result is that the ministries and, in particular, the State Department, are losing influence, which greatly complicates routine transactions for America's allies....

"The Europeans were surprised and in some cases inconvenienced by the President's handling of his odyssey, but their suspicions have been as nothing compared with the damage done to American relations with Japan. And while better contact with Peking may make Moscow more amenable, it has yet to be shown that China is either as important or as reliable a partner in the East as Japan."

## Brussels: "Malraux Mistakes China's Economic Aims"

Commenting on Andre Malraux's assertion that President Nixon's trip should open the way to a kind of Marshall Plan for industrializing the PRC, influential independent Le Soir of Brussels stated:

"Malraux overlooks the events that stirred China for the last five years. In fact, the cultural revolution was directed against what Mao's followers called economism; for example, the priority given to economic needs over the conversion of society....

"In fact, Mr. Malraux seems to have confused the international revolutionary attitude which is not (or not yet) of very large scale with domestic revolutionary strictness. The latter is the very foundation of Mao's system and, contrary to what Mr. Malraux believes, it probably will remain basically incompatible with American methods. And even if it were to change, it would draw closer to the Soviet model."

No. 23

9

2/18/72

Vienna: Effects on Vietnam War

Austrian media discussed the possible effects of the trip on the Vietnam war.
Vienna's independent Kronen-Zeitung asserted that "even if Peking wanted to,
it does not have the power" to stop the war because "Hanoi is not a satellite
of Peking....

"China will not let the North Vietnamese endanger an opening vis-a-vis the U.S. which it regards as expedient. But Hanoi, for its part, will not let Peking decide when to end the war in Indochina."

Independent Die Presse of Vienna yesterday carried its Washington correspondent's
report that "American hopes concentrate on Vietnam," but "all that is certain
is that Nixon's Peking trip will dominate the election campaign."

Rome TV: Reports From Washington, Peking

State-owned Italian TV's first network last night devoted more than half its
newscast to the trip, including film clips of the departure and a
paraphrase of Mr. Nixon's remarks over his voice. The second network
also showed preparations in Peking, reporting that the main square and other
central locations are decorated and that bookstores are displaying Western
classics.

Papers this morning front-paged the story under these headlines: "Nixon
States: 'It's a Journey for Peace''' (Corriere della Sera, Milan); "The 'Spirit
of 76' Began Its Historic Trip Yesterday - Nixon off for China 'In Peace for
All Mankind''' (La Stampa, Turin); "U.S. President's Historic Mission -
Nixon in Hawaii, First Leg of His Trip to China" (Messaggero, Rome),
and "Nixon Flies to China with the Hopes of the Entire Nation" (Resto del
Carlino, Bologna).

"A Psychological Turning Point"

Independent Corriere della Sera of Milan yesterday carried this assessment by
its New York correspondent:

"Nixon's Peking trip marks not only a diplomatic turning point but
also a psychological one.... It is like a passion exploding after being
contained for 20 years....

No. 23

10

2/18/72

"Conscious of the danger of concrete expectations based on this psychological atmosphere... President Nixon has pointed out that no important results are to be expected soon. But instinctively the American people believe that the real meaning of this trip lies not in its results but in the fact that it is being taken."

Left-of-center La Stampa of Turin asserted that Mr. Nixon "would not risk the prestige of his country and the confidence of his Asian allies for an electoral TV show," and added:

"No matter what the immediate results, the password is to be very optimistic..."

Rightist Tempo of Rome ran its Washington correspondent's report that "Nixon's trip will be only the first of a series of missions and meetings between U.S. and Chinese leaders in the years to come. It will be successful because both the Chinese and the Americans are determined to avoid a failure, although for different reasons."

Socialist Avanti of Rome headed its front-page story, "A Trip Which Lights Up the Hopes of the World..."

Rome Radio described it as "the most significant political event of the last 15 years."

Helsinki: "Opening to a Pact to Keep Balance in Asia?"

Finnish television last night carried a film clip of the President's departure statement and pointed out that "the visit will be followed all over the world by means of broadcasts transmitted by the excellent American TV technology."

Leading independent Helsingin Sanomat of Helsinki regarded the trip as a "great prestige victory" for Peking, but said "President Nixon can also easily consider the visit a victory, even if he returns home with seemingly empty hands...."

"Even if no concrete agreements are reached in Peking, the discussions can serve as an opening for exchanges which may lead to valuable results later. Perhaps the most valuable of all would be a joint non-aggression pact among Japan, China, the USSR and the U.S., which would permit a political balance in Asia."

No. 23

11

2/18/72

## Barcelona: "Could Be Pivotal for the World"

Spanish newspapers bannered the trip, calling Mr. Nixon a "new Marco Polo." Barcelona's *La Vanguardia* said, "We are certain Nixon will not return empty-handed," but rather with "agreements in principle." It predicted that agreements would be reached on "commercial relations, economic cooperation, opening of diplomatic relations, and peaceful coexistence," and concluded:

> "This historic voyage of Nixon could well be the first page of a new chapter of contemporary politics, the importance of which could be pivotal not only for the future of Asia but for the world."

## Tokyo TV: Take-Off Scenes By Satellite

Japanese television and radio networks this morning gave prominent coverage to the "historic journey." Led by NHK-TV, stations capped all morning news-casts with the departure story, including two minutes of satellite-transmitted scenes of the White House lawn ceremony and the Andrews take-off. Later telecasts reported the party's arrival in Hawaii.

Major Tokyo dailies gave banner play to the Nixon story in bold headlines such as "President Nixon Flies to China to Achieve Peace for Mankind," and radio-photos of the departure ceremony.

## "Japanese Militarism a Topic"

The national daily *Mainichi* declared editorially today that the visit "virtually means establishment of diplomatic ties. Sino-American relations will change from confrontation to dialogue. This will contribute much to the easing of tensions in Asia." On Sino-Japanese relations the paper stated:

> "China will surely point out the danger of a revival of Japanese militarism and ask the cooperation of the U.S. in preventing it. How will Nixon deal with this? The U.S. Administration is believed to be of the opinion that the U.S.-Japan Mutual Security Treaty is necessary not only for peace and security in the Far East, but also to prevent a revival of Japanese militarism.

No. 23

12

2/18/72

"If Nixon were to come out in defense of the treaty from this standpoint, it would have an undesirable effect on U. S. Japanese relations."

Moderate Tokyo Shimbun, in an editorial today "On the Eve of the Summit by the Century," said the dialogue in Peking, "which signifies the changes now going on in the world, will have great impact."

## Treatment of Green Visit

Media yesterday gave prominent play to the report of Assistant Secretary Green's coming visit to Japan, citing it as an indication the U. S. will live up to the commitment made at San Clemente to keep Japan informed of developments relating to the China issue.

## Seoul: "Fear Compromise on Korea"

The departure dominated the Seoul press yesterday and today. Papers reprinted substantial excerpts from Mr. Nixon's departure remarks. Mr. Kissinger's meeting with the South Korean Ambassador was front-paged.

Yesterday's press gave major play to the announcement of Assistant Secretary Green's visit to Seoul and other Asian capitals following the Peking talks.

Editorials stressed the idea that immediate, concrete results of the Peking talks would be few if any, and that the trip to Peking, even though "history-making," is only the beginning of a Sino-American dialogue. A common note of editorial concern was expressed today by Seoul's independent, middle-of-the-road Joongang Ilbo:

"What concerns us most... is the possibility that the two big powers will reach an arbitrary compromise on the situation on the Korean Peninsula..."

No. 23

13

2/18/72

Taipei: Press Invitation

All Taipei papers played up the invitation of local news organizations to
President Nixon's press corps to visit Taiwan after leaving the PRC.

Government Statement

The *Central Daily News* of Taipei said, "We trust the American President will live up to the solemn assurances that he has repeatedly made."

All dailies today led with a Foreign Ministry statement which said in part:

"The Government of the Republic of China hereby solemnly declares that it will consider null and void any agreement involving the rights and interests of the Government and people of the Republic of China which may be reached between the U.S. and the Chinese Communist regime as a result of that visit, because the regime now occupying the Chinese mainland is a rebel group which has no right whatsoever to represent the Chinese people....

"Under no circumstances will the basic national policy of the Government of the Republic of China to recover the Chinese mainland brook any change."

Hong Kong: Doubt China Will Ask For Aid

Independent *Ming Pao* of Hong Kong said today that "some positive achievements" could be expected from the Peking meeting but predicted that the Chinese were not likely to request U.S. aid since that would be "damaging to the country's prestige."

Independent *Sing Pao* yesterday saw the meeting as at the very least a significant switch by the U.S. and the Chinese Communists from confrontation to negotiation. The paper doubted that Peking would ask for U.S. aid, since such a request would not only draw criticism from the Soviet Union but would damage China's prestige.

No. 23

14

2/18/72

Pro-Communist *Ching Po* declared that the withdrawal of U. S. forces from Taiwan "must be and can be brought about, just as the devaluation of the U. S. dollar was induced by the currency's actual depreciation." The paper asserted that China "has the necessary strength and correct foreign policy to conduct effective diplomacy."

## Singapore Headlines

The Chinese-language press of Singapore was blanketed with photos and stories on the trip. Headlines included:

> "Nixon and Chinese Leaders to Seek Jointly New Order of Peace in Pacific," "Nixon Begins Trip to China as First Step Towards Improving U. S. Relations With China" and "American Congressmen Unanimously Back Nixon Trip."

## A New Zealand View

New Zealand's Christchurch *Press* noted today that "President Nixon regards this attempt to open negotiations with China as the most important decision he made in 1971. The Peking talks, in short, may be almost wholly exploratory and explanatory, leading towards normal diplomatic relations. Mr. Nixon will no doubt be well satisfied if he is able to open, at this late stage, regular channels of communications between the governments of the world's most populous nation and the world's most powerful nation."

## Calcutta: "All His Eggs in the Chinese Basket"

Headlines in Indian newspapers today generally referred to a "historic peace journey." The view most commonly expressed was that the U. S. and China share hatred and fear of Russia and sympathy for Pakistan, but otherwise the divergence of views is wide.

The independent *Hindusthan Standard* of Calcutta today declared that the "State Department denial" of any intention to enter into a defense pact with Pakistan cannot be believed, because "Nixon has all his eggs in the Chinese basket and on the eve of his visit he dares not take a step that runs contrary to known Chinese posture."

No. 23

15

2/18/72

A report from a Hong Kong correspondent in the independent *Hindustan Times* of New Delhi said that "if the talks fail, the result can be disastrous for Nixon" while if they are "a success in American terms it can be disastrous for China" by damaging its "image as an anti-imperialist champion."

## Black Caucus Complaint

Rightist *Motherland* of New Delhi reported the complaint of a 13-member black caucas in Congress that the Nixon party does not include any Negroes.

The pro-Soviet *Patriot* of New Delhi front-paged its own story from Moscow, stating, "The Soviet Union believes the Nixon Peking visit may retard the process of relaxation of international tensions and act against the interests of socialist states."

## Kathmandu: "Fitting and Proper"

The independent *Swatantra Samachar* of Kathmandu said yesterday:

> "Mutual understanding is the necessary prerequisite for peace; in this context, the American decision to seek friendly relations with the growing nuclear power, China, is altogether fitting and proper."

## Tunis: U.S. Aware of "World's Concern and Hope"

*La Presse* of Tunis stated today that President Nixon's meetings with allied heads of state and government before his trip to Peking and the announcement that Assistant Secretary Green would visit nine Asian countries "to inform them of the results of the Sino-American talks" reflected awareness of the "concern and hope as well as fear" felt all over the world about a Sino-American rapprochement. Supposing that Indochina will be the top agenda item in Mr. Nixon's discussions with Premier Chou, the paper concluded:

> "It is to be hoped that the first step toward peace will begin at this time. Let us hope that after the explosion of the Cultural Revolution, China, having taken its place in the family of nations, will continue on the road of peaceful coexistence, detente and cooperation which will finally enable humanity to achieve its old dream to live in peace."

No. 23

16

2/18/72

Nairobi: "A Trend- Setter for Other Nations? "

The pro-West Daily Nation of Nairobi today called the talks set for Peking
a "welcome development" even if they fail to produce "dramatic" results.
It concluded:

"If, as President Nixon says, the visit is undertaken 'without illusions' and 'without expectations of tactical gains,' it will be a trend-setter for nations in other parts of the world which despite intense animosity toward each other may find it worthwhile to establish sincere contact."

Latin American Media Play

Leftist La Opinion of Buenos Aires headlined today, "Richard Nixon Begins Most Delicate Diplomatic Mission in History." Prestigious La Prensa called it "historic" and front-paged wirephotos of the departure.

TV, radio and morning papers in Caracas today gave headline treatment to
the trip, with front-page pictures and heavy use of wireservice stories.
Independent El Nacional ran a roundup of political leaders' statements that
the trip was "Viewed With Hope and Sympathy in Venezuela."

Morning papers in Santiago varied in coverage from an eight-column banner
with radiophoto and map in conservative El Mercurio to complete omission
in extreme-left Puro Chile.

Headlines in Montevideo papers, including leftist ones, were favorable and
stressed Mr. Nixon's search for peace. Several front-paged color photos
of the departure. Top-circulation El Pais devoted all the news stories on
page one to the trip.

Communist El Popular declared that "thousands of soldiers will be needed"
in Peking "to prevent demonstrations of discontent and guarantee an official
welcome..."

No. 23

17

2/18/72

Peking: "U. S. Has No Wish to Change Hostile Position"

Peking media did not mention the President's departure, but reference to his
China visit appeared today in a long NCNA article "analyzing" last week's
foreign policy message, which, it said, was an outline for accelerating "world-
wide pursuit of the 'Nixon Doctrine.'" The NCNA piece was Peking's first
media comment on the message.

The article said in part:

"Referring to China, the U.S. President openly asserted
that she is the 'dedicated opponent' of U.S. imperialism.
This means that U.S. imperialism has no wish to change
its hostile position toward China.

"Referring to his visit to China and Sino-U.S. relations, he said: 'Our new dialogue with the People's Republic of China would not be at the expense of friends. Nevertheless, we recognize that this process cannot but be painful for our old friend on Taiwan.'"

The article asserted that this demonstrated that "the Nixon Administration has not yet relinquished its idea of 'one China, two governments.'"

NCNA further declared:

"The Chinese Government and people have always been friendly toward the American people. What we are opposed to is the policies of aggression and war of U.S. imperialism. We firmly support the peoples of the world in their struggle against U.S. imperialist aggression."

No. 23

18

2/18/72

Western Europe, p. 2 Asia, p. 11 Communist Countries, p. 17

PREDICTIONS ON EVE OF NIXON TRIP TO PEKING

Summary

Foreign media treatment of final preparations for President Nixon's departure tomorrow for Peking revealed high interest in spite of predictions that little more than a dialogue could result.

Among those calling it potentially the most important event since World War II were La Stampa of Turin, Chosun Ilbo of Seoul and Naya Samaj of Kathmandu.

In the absence of Peking comment on the impending visit, some observers recalled the idea that China historically has expected foreign leaders to come to it.

The *Times* of London said the Chinese leaders "see Mr. Nixon coming to Peking in the garb of a penitent, searching for a way out of his many dilemmas."

None, however, believed that Peking's propaganda attacks on U.S. actions in Indochina would affect Mr. Nixon's reception. Frankfurter Allgemeine said the President realizes that such "broadsides from the obsolescent anti-American arsenal" are intended for domestic consumption.

Concerns of Asian allies were heightened by the imminence of a Sino-American "summit":

- Tokyo's Nihon Keizai said Japanese leaders would be watching the Nixon visit with mingled "hope and uneasiness."

- Seoul's Donga Ilbo said the "visit is more likely to end up in a slight readjustment of the bilaterial relations" rather than in radical changes in the status quo of Asia.

- Bangkok's Prachatipatai said "pressure is being put on Mr. Nixon to auction South Vietnam to the Communists," but that yielding to the pressure would destroy "America's honor and good name."

Soviet media sustained its anti-Peking attacks, using various pegs including current SEATO exercises and U.S. bombing raids in South Vietnam.

Peking media refrained from comment on the Presidential visit.

* * *

No. 22

1

2/16/72

London: "China Assumes U.S. Admits Far East Failures"

The independent *Times* of London asserted in an editorial yesterday that Chinese media attacks on U.S. policies are "just the normal exchange of political debate.

"China's assumption is that not only in Vietnam but in the whole policy pursued for 20 years past in the Far East the Americans have failed and must now ruefully admit it. They see Mr. Nixon coming to Peking in the garb of a penitent, searching for a way out of his many dilemmas.

"Bristling with righteous arguments, the Chinese will be glad to help him--to clarify his position on Vietnam or any other point of crisis.... Of course, the Chinese, like Mr. Nixon, also have allies who complicate matters."

The paper declared that "it is hard to believe that the Chinese will think Mr. Nixon's misconceptions about Vietnam will have been exposed simply by press attacks."

"China's interest in an American withdrawal from any contiguous territories is bound to be the subject of forceful though polite argument. This remains an objective for them, irrespective of any settlement that may eventually be arrived at, as between the two halves of Vietnam."

"Mr. Chou's denial (that China will be discussing Vietnam with the President) may probably be taken to refer to any bargain over Vietnam as being out of the question at next week's talks."

"Myth of the Chinese Market"

Today's liberal *Manchester Guardian* stated that "the myth of the market of 700 millions thrives again in Chambers of Commerce across the U.S." and that Mr. Nixon will certainly raise the question of U.S.-Peking trade during his visit. It continued:

"Sources close to the White House have already floated the idea of sending a trade mission to China, claiming that Premier Chou En-lai has shown interest in the idea....

No. 22

2

2/16/72

"The real question which needs asking is not whether China will trade with the U.S., but to what extent and what effect this may have on Chinese attitudes towards their own development of science and technology."

The paper suggested that while the PRC "may buy from the U.S. those items of advanced technology which are absolutely essential for their own development... they are most likely to continue to rely on developing their own indigenous and intermediate technology to solve Chinese problems by Chinese means."

"Yet the temptation to take technological short cuts cannot be completely absent in Peking.... It illustrates the temptation which must face the Chinese as they welcome to Peking the most powerful salesman of the biggest trading company in the world."

## "TV Impact of Nixon-Mao Handshake"

In another article the paper stated that the President "will assure the Chinese that the U.S. will welcome and support their inclusion in the U.N. disarmament committee if they wish to join, according to informed sources." It said Mr. Nixon "plans to start a broad discussion with the Chinese on the whole field of disarmament and nuclear arms control..."

Yesterday, the paper said in a story from Tokyo, "A great guessing game preoccupies Japan before Mr. Nixon's visit to Peking. Increasingly, it is concerned with fears of economic contacts between China and the U.S. detrimental to Japan."

"The feeling here is that one of the main Chinese motives in inviting Mr. Nixon was to seek to develop economic links which would offset overdependence on Tokyo...."

"The television impact of Mr. Nixon shaking hands with Chairman Mao before cheering Chinese millions is expected to be enormous here and could powerfully accelerate popular pressures on the Japanese Government for a more conciliatory policy towards Peking."

The paper added that "the persistent question" in Tokyo "is whether Peking could really have agreed to receive Mr. Nixon without major conditions, including a long-term promise of disengagement from Taiwan and short-term pledge that President Thieu could soon make way in Saigon for the 'government of national concord' demanded by Hanoi."

No. 22

3

2/16/72

West German News Play

The White House announcement of further relaxation of restrictions on trade with China was a top story in several major West German papers yesterday. A number cited Tokyo's Yomiuri as saying the visit might result in the establishment of Sino-American diplomatic relations and an invitation to Chou En-lai to visit Washington, and that these would be 'another Nixon shock for Japan' with far-reaching consequences for Japan's political future.

"Peking's Obsolescent Broadsides"

Right-center Frankfurter Allgemeine said today that attacks on American policy in People's Daily of Peking would not distress President Nixon because he understands that such "broadsides from the obsolescent anti-American arsenal" are intended for domestic consumption. The second and more important addressee of attacks, the paper said, "is Hanoi, whose course prompts Mao's concern."

"Outwardly, North Vietnam displays unchanging neutrality between the USSR and China.... But the Soviet position in Hanoi is incomparably stronger than China's... In this situation, Peking wants to deprive the Soviets of the possibility of proving Mao-Nixon complicity by quoting from the Chinese press. Nixon will understand this because he would like to see China increase its influence over North Vietnam. America's hope of the Soviets exerting a restraining influence in Indochina vanished long ago."

"Visit Crowns a Long Process"

Yesterday the paper carried a by-liner's remarks that President Nixon's reference to a new chapter in U.S.-Chinese relations was "an understatement," and that "U.S.-Chinese summit discussions after 20 years of hostility" signified "overwhelming progress." He said the visit could justifiably be called a great success if it went off harmoniously and resulted in "permanent contact."

"In any event, the visit amounts to the crowning of a long process of skillful diplomatic effort. Few expected that President Nixon would 'jump over his own shadow of anti-Communist ideology' and reach such a 'revolutionary' decision based on 'realpolitik.'"

No. 22

4

2/16/72

# "Europe Can Keep Cool"

The Social Democratic weekly Vorwaerts said today that "it would be premature to expect initial contact to yield solid political results...."

"However, Nixon cannot return entirely empty-handed. Much would be gained if he obtained more latitude for his Soviet policy without playing off Peking and Moscow against each other..."

"Europe, for its part, can keep cool. Even if Nixon's trip is successful, the U.S. will not turn its back on Europe."

## "No Nixon Tribute to Peking"

The Washington correspondent of the independent General-Anzeiger of Bonn wrote today that Mr. Nixon's "judgment and performance" in Peking "may decide whether the talents of the largest nation on earth will become fully available to the rest of the world, as the President desires...."

"Charges that President Nixon has paid tribute to Peking for the invitation have proven unfounded. Nixon did not hesitate to order the heaviest air strikes against enemy positions in Vietnam, showing no concern for Peking's reaction. Moreover, the President has made it quite clear that his policy planning is not determined by the considerations of the election campaign, but in fact goes far beyond them. Finally, Henry Kissinger's presence ensures that an attempt will be made in Peking to discuss plans for a settlement in Asia and in the world."

"Nixon is resolved to establish permanent contact with Peking, perhaps by exchanging trade missions and commissioners who would act as 'shadow ambassadors.' His advisers firmly believe that such a success is possible. They argue that fundamental American and Chinese long-range interests are not in conflict. However, what may jeopardize the dialogue in spite of Nixon's flexibility is short-term interests in Vietnam and Taiwan."

In an editorial yesterday, the paper said that if the Peking discussions did not "get beyond controversial subjects of topical interest, like Vietnam and Taiwan," the meetings would only amount to "a historic handshake and a gigantic TV show."

No. 22

5

2/16/72

# "Long-Term Investments Like Moon Flights"

Independent *Stuttgarter Zeitung* observed that "it sometimes takes dramatic gestures to make effective policy." Because the timing of the trip was "dictated" by the elections, the editorial stated, "the President is compelled to be content with the optical effect of his trip and to forgo substance.

"This also applies to trips to the moon, critics say, but these trips are long-term investments."

A Washington correspondent for pro-Christian Democratic *Rheinische Post* of Duesseldorf and *Frankfurter Neue Presse* wrote yesterday that Mr. Nixon was preparing for the "historic meeting like a good student facing a crucial exam." The high point of his preparations, the correspondent reported, was the briefing by Mr. Malraux.

# West Berlin: "Chinese Expect Tribute of Foreigners"

The impending visit inspired feature articles on China in the West Berlin press.

A Hong Kong correspondent's report in today's independent *Tagesspiegel* said the official Chinese effort to "prepare the Chinese public" for the visit emphasizes "the wonderful change" that Mr. Nixon has undergone in his attitude toward China, and the fact that it is Mr. Nixon who is coming to Peking instead of a Chinese statesman going to Washington. The report noted that the latter emphasis is consistent with Chinese tradition and history when foreign rulers came to Peking to pay tribute to the Chinese emperor.

Pro-Social Democratic *Spandauer Volksblatt* carried a DPA agency report which alleged that while Chairman Mao Tse-tung "admires" Washington, Jefferson and Lincoln he regards Mr. Nixon as a "hypocritical jackal" and "a fascist warmonger."

# Paris: Coverage of Malraux Remarks

Influential *Figaro* of Paris today carried a report from its Washington correspondent headed, "ANDRE MALRAUX IN WASHINGTON: 'Nixon Peking Trip Has Meaning Only If It Paves Way for New Marshall Plan to Industrialize China.'"

Several papers carried their correspondents' stories on the Malraux press conference, quoting him as saying "the U.S. does not need a China policy, but it needs a Pacific policy, which is conceivable only for the whole area..."

No. 22

6

2/16/72

# "Moscow Trip More Important"

The cover story in the business weekly *Les Informations*, out yesterday, was titled "Yalta II." It said of the visits to Peking and Moscow that "the former is the more spectacular but the latter is of the most consequence" as it would "bring the answer to a vital question: Will the year 1972 mark the end of the era of Yalta?

"Since the end of World War II when the big two proudly partitioned the world between themselves, many new centers of power have emerged: Europe, Japan, and above all China, which is attacking on all fronts to loosen the stronghold of the big two.

"Will the Russian giant and the American giant proceed with an 'agonizing reappraisal' of the Yalta principles? Or will they try to prolong a system of sharing influence which, despite a few cracks, remains strong? Whichever policy they adopt, they can only do so together, or rather simultaneously. Such is the meaning of their meeting, a meeting on which the fate of the world partly depends..."

# "Conjunction Is Inevitable"

Concluding its two-part discussion of "The China Waiting for Nixon" (see *WTCI* No. 21, February 14), strongly anti-Communist *Aurore* of Paris said yesterday that the trip "marks an attempt to relocate the American focus on Asia, a financial migration from the Atlantic to the Pacific.

"America is resuming its historic march toward its own Far West.... The future of two great peoples is shaping up between the two sides of the Pacific. On one side stands post-industrial America with its prodigious material, technical and financial capacities; on the other, pre-industrial China looking for financial means, equipment and means of production. The conjunction is inevitable."

No. 22

7

2/16/72

A commentator wrote in yesterday's left-of-center *Combat* of Paris that "one can speak of a Moscow-Hanoi axis, both capitals being distrustful of a Nixon-Mao summit."

"China is believed more interested from now on in resuming bilateral relations with the U.S. than in encouraging the continuation, much less the escalation, of an Indochina war, thanks to which the USSR is intruding into its southern flank, as it has just done in Bengal. This is obviously an element to consider in the perspective of the Sino-American talks."

## Rome TV: "A Turning Point"

Italian television last night reported Mr. Ziegler's remarks to the press and noted that all preparations had been completed for a trip that "whatever the result, represents a remarkable turning point in international political life."

The broadcast included a lengthy obituary of Edgar Snow. It said he "maintained contact between the U.S. and Chinese cultures and acted as an intermediary for a rapprochement between the two countries."

Discussing arrangements for the trip, a TV commentator reported on Monday night that there were "no particular preparations on the Chinese side to receive Nixon, although civilian airports have removed anti-American slogans and some shops are repainting their signs, adding translations..."

"These changes may not be directly connected with Nixon's visit, but rather with Chinese domestic affairs..."

Radio and newspapers this morning carried reports of Mr. Nixon's schedule.

## "Mao's Idea But Chou's Doing"

Influential *Corriere della Sera* of Milan, in an article titled "Chou En-lai on a Hot Seat," stressed today that the invitation to Mr. Nixon was "Mao's idea but Chou's doing" and that if the trip is a failure, "Chou will be the scapegoat; if the trip is successful he will be the object of everybody's envy."

No. 22

8

2/16/72

"Trade Gesture Assures Chinese"

Yesterday the paper headlined, "More Trade Freedom Between U.S. and China Announced by Nixon Just Before Departure."

The paper judged that "this gesture clearly aims at creating the most favorable climate for the Presidential trip...

"It tells the Chinese leaders that they can count on U.S. technology for their future industrialization programs."

"Most Important Postwar Event?"

Turin's left-of-center La Stampa yesterday carried an article by its New York correspondent headed "Nixon's Troika--The Managers of the Peking Trip." It dealt with the roles of Messrs. Kissinger, Ehrlichman and Haldeman:

"These men have...produced the Peking trip which may in the long term be the most important event of the postwar."

Communist L'Unita of Rome yesterday ran an editorial analyzing Chinese and U.S. objectives. It said that "several observers believe that China has an advantage over the U.S. at the starting point....

"The U.S. needs China more than China needs the U.S. But it would be foolish to think that Nixon is demeaning himself by going to Peking....

"It is rather more reasonable to suppose that on the one hand he is trying to sharpen the USSR-Chinese conflict...and on the other he is trying to reduce Chinese support of the Indochina fighters....

"On the latter point, most observers agree that Nixon is nourishing some illusions.... At any rate, whatever the results, this trip will introduce new and important elements in the international picture."

No. 22

9

2/16/72

Zurich: "Trip Exacts a Political Price"

Switzerland's prestigious _Neue Zuercher Zeitung_ asserted today:

"The announcement of Nixon's trip may prove more important than the trip itself.... This visit cannot produce a far-reaching accommodation of interests. Difficulties may appear just as the dialogue is initiated.

"This enterprise also exacts a political price, which one hopes will not be excessive, particularly in Japan. There the damage seems to be small so far. But it has already proved to be considerable in Korea, Taiwan and Thailand.

"By this we do not mean to say that the policy shift was a mistake. It had to be made and could not have been made better by any other President than Nixon, who...can afford to jettison ideological ballast. He is probably right in considering this initiative the most important breakthrough of his first term. Its exploitation in the election campaign is unavoidable, but this does not exhaust its significance."

Vienna: "Journeys Into the Unknown"

Journalist Hugo Portisch, writing in Vienna's independent _Kurier_, declared that "the Nixon trips affect much more than American relations with China and the Soviet Union. They will also change relations between Peking and Moscow and thus relations between Moscow and Washington."

"After Nixon's trips, the state of the world will no longer be the same... Though he understands today's hard facts, even Nixon can hardly judge the hard facts of tomorrow. Despite very careful preparations, his trips to Peking and Moscow are journeys into the unknown."

Stockholm: "Why the Invitation?"

Liberal _Dagens Nyheter_ of Stockholm today ran a lengthy editorial raising the question, "Why did the Chinese leadership invite Nixon in the first place?" It speculated that Mao had concluded that "the antagonism between China and the Soviet Union weighed more heavily and cut more deeply than that between China and the U.S..."

"In such a situation it was in China's interest at least to establish contact with the Americans, especially since the U.S.--unlike the Soviet Union--might have something to offer territorially--Taiwan."

No. 22

10

2/16/72

Tokyo TV on U.S. Trade Relaxation

Commenting on the further relaxation of U. S. restrictions on trade with China, Japan's NET television said today that the announcement "was a skillful move aimed for political effect." NHK-TV called it a "gesture of goodwill."

Ministry of Trade Views

Kyodo news agency reported yesterday that the Japanese Ministry of Trade and Industry had welcomed the announcement as one which would "benefit Japanese efforts toward easing its restrictions with China and abolishing the Coordinating Committee for Export Control (COCOM) list for Communist countries." The report also noted that Ministry officials had called the U. S. decision "a strategic step" for the expansion of U. S. trade with China, a subject said to be on the Nixon-Chou agenda. The agency's report continued:

"To keep up with the U. S. move it may be necessary for Japan to consider easing restrictions on the use of Japan Export-Import Bank funds for exports to China, Ministry sources said.

"While Nixon's step will not unfavorably affect Japanese exports to China for the time being, Japan must be prepared for stronger U. S. competition on the China market in the long run, they added."

"Abolish COCOM!"

Independent liberal Asahi said today that the relaxation of trade restrictions indicated a "strong U. S. desire" for increased trade with China and abandonment of the policy to "contain China." The paper said "there is a great possibility of the U. S. and China reaching some form of agreement on reopening of direct trade.... This would lead to the speedy automatic collapse of COCOM." It concluded that the COCOM restrictions, "inherited from the cold war, should be abolished totally and immediately."

No. 22

11

2/16/72

Business-oriented *Nihon Keizai* of Tokyo said yesterday that Japan-China trade was entering a new phase, but predicted that "efforts for expansion will bear no fruit unless the political obstacles to the development of the trade between the two countries are removed."

## "Hope and Uneasiness"

Today the paper said Japanese leaders would be watching the Nixon visit "with hope and uneasiness." It said Japan expected the visit to result in the establishment of some "permanent U. S. agency" in China to continue contacts, as well as in the expansion of trade and cultural and personal exchanges. The report added:

> "Japan is hopeful that the Nixon visit will contribute to Asian peace and stability by substituting dialogue for confrontation in Sino-American relations.... Japanese leaders do not deny the possibility of some form of deal between the U. S. and China on the handling of Taiwan and the Asian security problems."

Today's independent-moderate *Mainichi* noted increased Soviet anti-Chinese propaganda and asserted that the Peking trip "will lead to an intensification of the Sino-Soviet confrontation." Such a result, it declared, would be undesirable for Japan, "which is trying to broaden its relations with both."

## Problems of Japan-China Relations

Independent-moderate *Yomiuri* of Tokyo said the talks can be considered historic in the sense that they close one era and open another in which, as the foreign policy report stated, Sino-American relations will be based on a new foundation of equality and mutual respect.

The Japanese view that there will be little substantive result of the Peking meetings has encouraged the Government, the paper said, "to establish closer ties with Taiwan.

> "This attitude has caused Japan-China relations to worsen decisively and provides a foundation for the continuation of the cold war in East Asia.... The Government's efforts to establish contact with North Vietnam and the restoration of diplomatic relations with Mongolia will not make any positive contribution to the improvement of Japan-China relations."

No. 22

12

2/16/72

Moderate Tokyo Shimbun, which carries left-leaning articles, welcomed efforts to establish normal relations with Mongolia and hoped that success in that initiative would open the way for "normalization of relations with other Communist countries."

## Seoul: "Expect No Change in Status Quo"

Moderate Chosun Ilbo of Seoul called the Peking trip "the most remarkable diplomatic feat since World War II."

It hoped the visit would help the cause of peace and also "that Mr. Nixon will live up to his repeated pledge that the U. S. negotiations with Red China... will not impair third-country interests."

Leading Donga Ilbo today judged that the talks could lead to trade and cultural agreements, and added:

> "Despite such agreements, they are expected to leave many issues unresolved. Seen in this light, President Nixon's visit is more likely to end up in a slight readjustment of the bilateral relations with Red China than to effect radical changes in the status quo of Asia."

## Manila: Speculative Headlines

The top circulation Manila Times and its sister Daily Mirror headlined today, "Nixon to Use Chou's Plane While in China."

The nationalist Philippines Herald's headline read, "No Viet Talks Seen in RN Peking Visit."

The Manila Bulletin ran a speculative report, "Mao Not Meeting Nixon."

## Bangkok: "Sellout of SVN Would Spread to Laos"

Prachatipatai of Bangkok declared yesterday:

> "Pressure is being put on Nixon to auction South Vietnam to the Communists in his coming talks with Red Chinese leaders.... But should America agree to this Communist demand, the Communist Pathet Lao would demand the resignation of Lao Premier Prince Souvanna Phouma, as well as the abdication of the King of Laos....

No. 22

13

2/16/72

"Should peace be restored to Indochina through the ousting and punishment--with U.S. approval and support--of chiefs of state and leaders who have opposed the Communists, America's honor and good name will be completely destroyed. It is certain that most American politicians will not let that happen."

## "Communists Expect U.S. Concessions"

Moderately conservative Siam Rath of Bangkok today expressed pessimism about the meetings:

"They will most probably not attain any real results unless the U.S. does as it has done since 1969--continue to make concessions to the Communists....

"This is because America has made so many concessions... without obtaining any response from the other side, that the latter have become spoiled and expect one-sided concessions as their due."

## Kathmandu: "Great Possibilities"

Kathmandu's Naya Samaj yesterday called the visit to Peking the most significant event since World War II and said that it has great possibilities for improving mutual understanding and cooperation, "although no quick results should be expected.

"An era of negotiations necessarily must follow the visit. If this is achieved, then Nixon's trip can be called a success."

Independent Swatantra Samachar said the visit was "a significant step" in the direction of trust and peace between two nations that have long been at logger-heads.

## Istanbul: "Small States Must Watch Big States"

A by-line article in Istanbul's moderate-left Cumhuriyet said last Friday that the U.S. was turning to China because it had "lost hope" in obtaining Soviet support for a solution in Indochina and because Washington was concerned

No. 22

14

2/16/72

about the growth of Soviet influence in Asia. The writer said the U. S. might ask Peking to use its influence in Hanoi, declaring that "although one cannot think that China would sell out North Vietnam, Hanoi has some reason to worry.

"Yesterday's East-West division in world politics has been replaced by the reality of the 'big-state-smaller-state.' And smaller states, including Turkey, which depend on the idea that powerful allies will protect them, should watch closely the maneuverings among the big states."

Conservative *Turcumen* of Istanbul saw a new political balance emerging in Asia:

"It is already clear that Russia and India are playing the major role in this area. By taking Pakistan's side, the U. S. seems to have met with political failure unless President Nixon... reaches a special agreement with Communist China.... Whatever the future may be, the Soviets have won the first round in the Asian match. But no victory is permanent in politics...."

### Tel Aviv: "Hope Trips Will Lead to Understanding"

Al Hamishmar of Tel Aviv, organ of the MAPAM (United Workers' Party) today expressed hope that "the efforts of the U. S. President in his visits to Peking and Moscow will bring about a consolidation of world peace and the crystallization of solutions leading to understanding and accord... between the powers no less than... among those more distantly concerned with their disputes."

### Dakar: "Chinese Masses Know Nothing of Mr. Nixon"

Senegal's only daily, partly Government-owned *Le Soleil* of Dakar, carried a report that Chinese media were "being discreet" about the visits, "not even publishing a photo of Mr. Nixon," with the result that "the Chinese masses know nothing" about the President. It said party cadres knew of the visit because they read a foreign news digest.

No. 22

15

2/16/72

## Kampala: "Nixon Must Not Exploit Tensions"

An editorial last Saturday in Kampala's independent *Uganda Argus* expressed the hope that Mr. Nixon would resist trying to exploit Sino-Soviet tensions, declaring:

> "For the purpose of achieving a stable world and defusing cold war tensions, the American President had better stick to his work, especially so since a loose detente now exists between Washington and Moscow.

> "In Peking, Mr. Nixon will be just preparing the ground for a detente, while in Moscow... it will be a question of making a detente a reality. Both tasks are as important as they are difficult to achieve."

## Lome: "World Should Resist Cold War Conditioning"

Government-run *Togo-Presse* of Lome yesterday noted "conflicting reactions" throughout the world to the President's visit to Peking.

The paper expressed hope that observers would resist their "cold war conditioning" and welcome the Nixon trip, declaring that "the main point to this historic tete-a-tete in Peking is that positive solutions be found to the many problems that concern the two countries."

## Mexico City Headlines Recognition of PRC Before Nixon Trip

Establishment of diplomatic relations between Mexico and the People's Republic of China was bannerlined yesterday by all Mexico City papers, which stressed that the action was "fully consistent" with Mexico's independent foreign policy traditions.

Thus left-of-center, influential *Excelsior* called Mexico's position "sovereign and realistic" and said the country "wants not to be considered a passive object of international policy but to assume its responsibilities as an active entity capable of making its own decisions, as a nation ready to maintain relations necessary to its growth."

No. 22

16

2/16/72

A columnist in the same paper wrote:

> "If it was thought that State Department representatives prevented establishment of these relations, the fact this step was taken a week before the trip of the U.S. President to China is clear proof that they were inefficient."

## Moscow Media Exploit Anti-Peking Themes

Soviet media referring to Mr. Nixon's trip continued to hang anti-Peking allegations on every handy hook (WTCI No. 18, February 9), including current SEATO exercises in the South China Sea and intensified U.S. bombing raids in South Vietnam.

Thus Moscow radio broadcasting in English to South Asia on Monday said:

> "There have been reports in the world press that during President Nixon's stay in the Chinese People's Republic, the SEATO bloc will hold naval exercises in the South China Sea. It is common knowledge that this bloc has an aggressive drive and plays an important role in the fight of American imperialism against the national liberation movement of the Asian people."

> "The report of these coming maneuvers could not have passed unnoticed in Peking. However, officials in the Chinese capital prefer to keep silent. It appears, as the Washington Post has remarked, that the present Peking leaders are rather tolerant toward the U.S. policy in Asia, if not supporting it faithfully. What is more, the Americans who have been to Peking in the past few days tell newsmen they are delighted with the reception accorded them by the Chinese authorities. They describe the reception as nothing short of fantastic..."

No. 22

17

2/16/72

"The attitude of the Peking leaders toward the coming SEATO military exercises in the South China Sea is very symptomatic. It shows once again the profound degeneration of the present Chinese leaders. In reality, the interests of the national liberation movement are alien to them."

Yesterday, Moscow TASS reported, *Izvestia* carried a commentary also attacking the SEATO exercises and linking them to heavier U. S. bombing raids and the President's trip. TASS said in part:

"'The thunder of bombs and shells exploding in the South China Sea echoed by the explosions of bombs dumped every day on the liberated areas of Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos is an accompaniment, as it were, to the U. S. President's visit to Peking,' the *Izvestia* writer notes. This is realized by all, but why is Peking silent?

"Why is it that the Peking leadership, so vehement verbally in denouncing imperialism, shuts its eyes to provocations directed against the peoples of Indochina? Evidently the answer should be sought in the Peking leaders' special interest in 'good' relations with U. S. imperialism."

*Peking: No Comment on Trip*

Peking media, meanwhile, refrained from comment on the Presidential visit.

No. 22

18

2/16/72

1971 a Move
Toward
A Generation
Of Peace

(Excerpted from "United States Foreign Policy for the 1970's, The Emerging Structure of Peace," a report by President Richard Nixon to the Congress, February 1972)

I have stated many times that we seek a generation of peace. That is the goal of this Administration, and it is against that standard that the initiatives of 1971 should be judged.

In the last analysis, only the future will tell whether or not the developments of the past year have truly brought us closer to that goal. All we can say with certainty now is that a generation of peace is a more credible goal at the end of 1971 that it appeared to be at its beginning. It may still appear to be distant. It does not, however, still appear fanciful and utopian.

That fact in itself is important. Both this country and the world need a brighter vision than managing crises and aiming only at staving off the ultimate conflagration. The influence which history and our own efforts have given this Nation can—and must—be used for something more than an organization of world affairs which aims merely at keeping international animosities in some sort of tenuous, fragile and constantly endangered balance. The containment of enmity is better than its release. But it is not enough as a permanent goal.

No More Shortsighted Policy

For too long, American policy consisted of reacting to events. We had a sense of mission, but rarely a clear definition of our purpose. We were drawn into situations, responding tactically, without a clear perception of where we would end up. When we were not forced by events, we seldom struck out along new paths because we had no positive conception of where we wanted to go.

Our times demand more. A durable peace is a set of conditions and requires a conscious effort to create those conditions. Peace will not come about by itself, with us passively looking on or striking moralistic poses. Nor will it come about automatically with the ending of a war. How many wars in this century have ended without bringing a lasting peace because statesmen failed to shape a durable peace out of the conditions which emerged from the conflict? This is why it makes a difference how we liquidate the vestiges of

an earlier era as we move into the new. The future of peace—in Asia, in the Middle East, in Europe—depends in large measure upon the steadfastness and purposefulness of American policy all around the world.

Today the United States is once again acting with assurance and purpose on the world stage.

Vietnam War Winding Down

Vietnam no longer distracts our attention from the fundamental issues of global diplomacy or diverts our energies from priorities at home.

Our dramatic departures of the past year—the fruits of our planning and policies over three years—reflect the historical conditions we see today and the historic possibilities we see for tomorrow. They were momentous steps, accelerating the very process of change which they addressed. The world—and we ourselves—are still in the process of adjusting to the developments we have set in train. But we know where we are going. We are moving with history, and moving history ourselves.

There will always be conflict in the world, and turbulent change and international rivalries. But we can seek a new structure of global relationships in which all nations, friend and adversary, participate and have a stake. We can seek to build this into a world in which all nations, great and small, can live without fear that every conflict contains for them the potential for Armageddon. In such a structure of peace, habits of moderation and compromise can be nurtured, and peoples and nations will find their fullest opportunities for social progress, justice, and freedom.

This is what we mean by a generation of peace.

Monday. FEB.21,1972

MONDAY, a weekly publication is sent to contributors of $25.00 or more. Of which $5.00 is for subscription to MONDAY per annum.

Republican National Committee
310 First Street, S.E.
Washington, D.C. 20003

Senator Bob Dole—Chairman
Tom Evans—Co-Chairman
Anne Armstrong—Co-Chairman
John D. Lofton, Jr.—Monday Editor

Bill Fleishell—Art—Design Pam Pitzer—Editorial Assistant
Elizabeth Burke—Art
Second Class Postage Paid at Washington, D.C.

Vol. 4 No. 6

2

Monday, Feb. 21, 1972

O'BRIEN PUTS PARTY ABOVE COUNTRY
IN PLAYING POLITICS WITH VIETNAM

Of all the Democrats who have switched clothes on
Vietnam, none have turned their coats faster and in a
more pronounced manner than Democratic National
Chairman Larry O'Brien.

As one of the Johnson-Humphrey Administration's chief tub-thumpers for escalation in Vietnam, O'Brien repeatedly urged audiences to get behind the President on the war and show the enemy the United States was not divided and weak.

For example, in July of 1966 in an address in
Washington, D.C., O'Brien declared:

Support the President

"We must show the world that we are determined to see a successful conclusion to our fight for freedom in Vietnam...To achieve this end, we must show that we are united behind the President's policy of fear-less resistance to aggression. As our President strives to convince the aggressors that this final form of warfare must be abandoned, we must not permit anyone to believe that his policy is a minority policy...Let us end any delusion, any war prolonging delusion, by showing the President in unmistakable fashion that he has your support as well as your prayers in these trying times."

In 1966, O'Brien told an audience: "I know you will perform your *patriotic duty*; I know you will continue to give the President your active support and your prayers as he strives to secure a just peace—not only for the people in Vietnam but for all people who treasure liberty and yearn for democracy."

Hanoi Watching Dissent

In another talk in August of 1966, O'Brien pointed
out in an Arlington, Va. address: "Hanoi sees in our
dissent over our policy in Vietnam direct evidence
that we are not mentally prepared. As the result of
some dissenting voices at home, Hanoi sees us as a
nation of affluent summer soldiers and sunshine
patriots, a land of contented consumers."

In June of 1967 in South Orange, N.J., O'Brien spoke derisively of so-called "peace lovers" and contrasted them with President Johnson whom he called a "peace maker."

"There's nothing special about a peace lover. Even a
loud one," O'Brien asserted before a Seton Hall
University commencement crowd. "But it takes con-
siderable thought, energy, imagination, diplomacy,
and, in the world in which we live, sometimes force
to be a peace maker. The President needs help in

'And That's the Jackass that Pushed Me In'

making peace. He's asked for it, but sometimes he
can only hear the anguished cries of peace lovers."

But things are different now for Larry O'Brien. The former cheer-leader for the Johnson-Humphrey policies of escalation in Vietnam is now an outspoken critic of President Nixon's policy in Vietnam which has brought home nearly all the men sent to war by Mr. O'Brien's party. O'Brien has now joined the "peace lovers" whose anguished cries he used to delight in mocking.

O'Brien Rejects Unity Now

Appearing recently on the NBC Today Show, the Democratic National Chairman was asked if there wasn't some validity to Republican suggestions that a united front behind President Nixon might help in negotiating a way out of Vietnam. O'Brien disagreed saying such an idea is "injurious to the future of the Nation" and "detrimental to every American."

Why what O'Brien himself advocated in 1966 and
1967 is now harmful to the Nation, O'Brien did not
say. NBC's Bill Monroe did not ask him. But the
answer is apparent. When Larry O'Brien, who once
called for unity behind a Democratic President mak-
ing war, now rejects a call for unity behind a Repub-
lican President making peace, one can only conclude
that the primary motivation is political. Clearly the
Democratic National Chairman is putting his party
above his country when it comes to the issue of
Vietnam.

3

Monday, Feb. 21, 1972

## LARRY O'BRIEN, PATRIOTIC DUTY AND VIETNAM; OR, MY HOW TIMES CHANGE ESPECIALLY WHEN YOUR PARTY'S ESCALATING THE WAR AND THE OTHER PARTY IS BRINGING THE TROOPS HOME

When his party and his President were escalating the war in Vietnam, there wasn't a hawkier hawk around than Larry O'Brien. In speeches from one end of the country to the other O'Brien defended both the U.S. commitment to South Vietnam and the conduct of the war itself.

In Des Moines, Iowa in 1966, O'Brien talked about appeasement, Neville Chamberlain, warned against "trembling knees" in fighting for freedom, and declared: "Let us remember in defending Vietnam...we are defending Iowa...and Massachusetts...and all the free world." Appeasement, O'Brien warned, "is but a down payment on a mortgage that comes due quickly and is payable in blood."

### Vietnam and Newark

In New Jersey, at a dinner honoring a Democratic Congressman, O'Brien spoke of Americans fighting and dying in Vietnam to protect "freedom here in Newark..." To those who argued priorities, O'Brien responded: "The Nation is strong enough, secure enough, dedicated enough to defend freedom abroad while meeting our responsibilities at home."

In Washington speaking to a group of magazine publishers, O'Brien denounced the enemy in Vietnam as "modern age pirates, assassins, terrorists, and saboteurs..." The hard lesson is that we do not find peace through cowardice or appeasement," he declared. "History shows that weakness tempts aggression, and strength deters it."

In Oakland, California, O'Brien labeled calls for a U.S. pull out from Vietnam not only simple but "simple-minded." To abandon an ally such as South Vietnam to Communist aggression, he said, would be to break faith "with ourselves."

### O'Brien Defends Elections

In Lincoln, Nebraska, O'Brien defended the 1966 elections in South Vietnam calling them "a 'shot heard throughout Asia,' just as two centuries ago we fired the shot heard round the world."

In San Juan, Puerto Rico, O'Brien told a National Association of Postmasters audience to speak out on the issue of how to achieve an honorable peace in Vietnam. "Pin down those who substitute wishes for hard thought," he urged. "Ask them what they would do if the Communists continue to refuse to come to the peace table."

This was a good question in 1966 when O'Brien asked it and it is a good question now. Larry?

ATTORNEY GENERAL JOHN N. MITCHELL (center) of the President. In his letter accepting Mitchell's resignation, he develops a plan to develop "greater public support for the forces of law and order," and to replace him at a GOP reception with RNC Co-Chairman Tom Evans as the new Attorney General. The move is seen by some as a prelude to a later bid for the Democratic nomination.

## PRESIDENTIAL PRESSURE ON CONGRESS TOWARD SEPARATE ELECTORAL VOTES

While many are now claiming credit for Congressional movement toward passage of legislation to curb nationally disruptive strikes in the transportation industry, and for the settlement of the disastrous West Coast dock strike, the fact of the matter is that the driving force behind each of these accomplishments is President Nixon and his Administration.

The record speaks for itself:

Over two years ago, the President sent to the Democrat-controlled Congress a special message on labor disputes in the transportation industry and proposed the Emergency Public Interest Protection Act of 1970, designed to mitigate work stoppages which imperil the national interest.

### Action Urged Two Years Ago

In March, the President sent a special message to Congress to avert stoppage of rail service and submitted legislation urged the previous month. In September, following two more rail crises, the Presi-

4

Monday, Feb. 21, 1972

The Committee for the Re-Election Committee, President Nixon praised him as a man who had helped and justice throughout the country." Mitchell is shown here in his capacity as RNC Chairman. Bob Dole, left, and RNC Chairman Sen. Bob Dole. As Mitchell's secretary, he has resigned to join the Committee.

## GRESS, BIG LABOR MOVES DOCK STRIKE
## SETTLEMENT

In a letter to Congressional leaders, again urged passage of his legislation to settle long-standing railway labor disputes once and for all. In December, the President signed temporary legislation dealing with RR strikes and again called for passage of his still pending legislation.

In February of last year, the President sent a second message to Congress recommending passage of his Emergency Public Interest Protection proposal, saying that the need was more urgent than ever. In May, in a statement on signing into law a provision to end crippling national RR strikes, the President once more underscored the need for passage of permanent legislation to deal with the problem. In September, the President met with both sides in the West Coast dock strike to promote settlement. In a media briefing he again stressed the need for legislation to deal with not only that strike but other strikes in transportation industry as well.

(Continued next page)

## PRESIDENT TELLS CONGRESSMEN THAT STATUS QUO ON BUSING IS UNACCEPTABLE

President Nixon has met with several members of Congress and assured them that the status quo on busing is unacceptable to him and that something is going to be done about the matter and done soon. Things will not be allowed to remain as they now are, the President told the Congressmen.

Ron Ziegler, White House press secretary, said that during the one and a half hour meeting with members of the House and Senate who are promoting anti-busing Constitutional amendments, the President assured them "he is not going to leave the situation as it is."

"The question here," Ziegler said the President believes, "is what is the best solution to the problem—Constitutional amendment or other courses of action."

### Busing Counter-Productive

Noting that there is now a situation where court-ordered busing is of such a magnitude that it is widely believed counter-productive to the education of the children involved, Ziegler said: "We're not going to leave the situation as it is. The question is not identifying the problem, the question is how to proceed."

Commenting on the meeting with the President, Senate GOP Whip Robert Griffin said: "It was very clear from the meeting that the President is going to do something about it (busing) in the near future."

Tennessee Sen. Howard Baker, also in the meeting, said: "My own private judgment is that as a result of the President's opposition to busing for racial balance, we are about to see an end to the problem of busing as we know it, as it is required by district courts in some jurisdictions."

To make recommendations to deal with the problem of busing, President Nixon has asked a Cabinet-level committee to study all possible solutions and approaches and submit the suggestions to him after he returns from his trip to China.

### President Long Opposed to Busing

President Nixon has long been an outspoken foe of busing children to achieve racial balance. In August of last year, the President declared: "I am against busing as that term is commonly used in school desegregation cases. I have consistently opposed the busing of our Nation's school children to achieve a racial balance, and I am opposed to the busing of children simply for the sake of busing."

Last November, the President congratulated House Republican leaders on anti-busing amendments attached to a school aid bill. White House press secretary, he has resigned to join the Committee for the Re-Election

(Continued next page)

5

Monday, Feb. 21, 1972

BUSING

(Continued from previous page)

tary Ziegler commented on the House action: "I believe it supports the posture that the President has taken regarding busing." One of the amendments passing the House, which prohibits any of the $1.5 billion in school aid from being used for busing, was specifically requested by the Nixon Administration.

While President Nixon has stated unequivocally his opposition to forced busing to achieve a racial balance, the Democrats position on the issue (with the notable exception of Sen. Henry Jackson) is not very clear.

Asked on the NBC "The Loyal Opposition" show what her party might say on the issue of busing, Pat Harris gave an answer the wishy-washiness of which undoubtedly turned Sen. Muskie green with envy.

Democrats Wishy-Washy on Busing

Starting with an appeal to deal with what she called "the realities of the 20th Century," the Chairman of the Credentials Committee of the Democratic National Committee suggested that "sense" be talked to the American people on the issue. She was for the control of local school boards, she went on, but "that is not the issue here." The issue is "quality education," she said, and busing does not affect negatively the quality of anybody's education. Coming out foursquare for the position that no child should be educationally "unduly disadvantaged," Mrs. Harris then finally got around to busing, which she said must be continued if this means that "all children have access to the best education," which she didn't say it meant. Mrs. Harris concluded with: "I think we are going to talk about issues like this, the reality, and not the phoniness."

Moving on to other new "realities" in an obvious effort to get off the busing issue, DNC Chairman Larry O'Brien at this point turned the conversation to how little free TV time the Democrats were being allowed by the networks, an hour of which he and his fellow Democrats were enjoying at the time the charge was being made.

HUBERT AT THE STAKE?

"To the extent that the Democratic Party permits its campaign against Mr. Nixon to turn into a kind of grand internal heresy proceeding against itself on Vietnam, Senator Humphrey figures to be among the first led to the stake."—Excerpted from Washington Post editorial comment on HHH's announcement of his candidacy for President.

DEMOCRATS IGNORE STRIKE PLEA

Within the past month, Agriculture Secretary Earl Butz has written two letters each to Senators Muskie, Humphrey, McGovern, Jackson and Hartke requesting that they "heed the call of farmers and join us in our efforts to deal reasonably and sensibly—and immediately—with the transportation work stoppages." Pointing out that the West Coast dock strike is costing the American farmer $5 and a half million in reduced farm product exports every working day of the week, Butz asked the Democratic Presidential candidates to use their influence to support the emergency strike legislation before Congress. To date, only one, McGovern, has responded and he declined to help. The other Democrats have not yet answered the Secretary's letters.

DOCK STRIKE

In December, President Nixon again issued a public statement on the urgency of emergency strike legislation. Since his first message, there had been many railroad and port shutdowns. The legislation still languished deep in a Democrat-controlled committee. In January, in his State of the Union address, the President again issued a public call for his legislation and sent a message to Congress providing procedure for settlement of the West Coast dock strike and calls for action to prevent crippling transportation strikes.

President Meets With Governors

In February, this month, the President met with the Governors of California and Washington on the problem and for the umpteenth time asked Congress to take action.

Also this month, the President sent another message to the Congress again urging enactment of the West Coast Dock Strike Resolution and the Crippling Strikes Prevention Act (formerly the Emergency Public Interest Protection Act of 1970).

As the Congress began to focus on the West Coast Dock Strike legislation, the disputants on both sides began to negotiate seriously to settle their differences. As was predicted, passage by the Congress of the emergency legislation coincided with settlement of the West Coast dock strike.

The Crippling Strikes Prevention Act is designed to avoid national calamities brought about by such transportation disruptions as the dock strike. The dock strike was settled through the persistent efforts of the President—hopefully the Crippling Strikes Prevention Act will be enacted by Congress with the same determination.

6

Monday, Feb. 21, 1972

## POLITICAL POTPOURRI:

While his aides are publicly telling the press that the Senator is pleased with all the attention his criticism of President Nixon's Vietnam peace plan has gotten him, privately Sen. Edmund Muskie is said to be furious over the amount of flack he has taken. A source within the Muskie organization tells *Monday* that Muskie, who originally praised President Nixon's peace disclosures, feels his advisors gave him bum dope in suggesting that he attack the President's efforts for peace. Those giving Muskie the bad advice were Paul Warnke, Clark Clifford and Averell Harri man. The Muskie attack on the President was written by these three men and Tony Lake of the Senator's staff. The speech was handed to Muskie at the last minute and he read it for the first time while actually delivering it.

## Muskie Patronizes White-Only Club

When Sen. Edmund Muskie resigned his membership in the white-only Congressional Country Club a few weeks ago, an aide told the press that he had decided to call it quits because during his two years as a member he had been unable to change the policy from within. *Monday* has learned that as revolting as the Senator may have considered the Club's policy as a member, he has no qualms about playing it's golf course as a guest, most recently on Feburary 6. At that time, Muskie played with Maine Democratic Rep. William Hathaway and Dick Kurras, a lobbyist for American Ingbretzin steamship line.

## Muskie Theme Song?

Suggested campaign song for Muskie: "Vacillating Rhythm."

## College Students for Nixon

**Pollwatch:** President Nixon has won New Hampshire's second mock college election. With 43 percent of the N.H. Technical Institute student body voting, the President topped Sen. Muskie 47 percent to 19 percent; McCloskey, 14; McGovern, 13; HHH, 2; Jackson, 2; Yorty and Lindsay, 1; and Endicott Peabody's stalking horse, Sen. Vance Hartke, 0. In a previous mock election on the campus of N.H. College, the President beat Muskie 32 percent to 28 percent; McGovern, 15; HHH, Lindsay, McCloskey, 3; and Ashbrook, Hartke and Yorty, 1...The current Gallup Poll shows President Nixon's popularity at a four month high with 53 percent of Americans expressing approval of his performance in office...a U. of North Carolina statewide poll shows the President beating Muskie, 40-29 percent; Kennedy, 38-35; and HHH, 45-23.

## GOP LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE

The Republican National Leadership Conference will meet in Washington, D.C. March 1-4 with the theme "Together-Again!" for this invitational gathering of top echelon Republicans from the 50 states. The purpose of the Conference is to bring together Party leaders, elected Administration officials and the 1972 campaign team. Administration briefings, workshops and panel discussions with top Republican political professionals and campaign specialists will be featured. Speakers for the Conference include: Sens. Lowell Weicker, Bill Brock and Gordon Allott; Reps. Bill Steiger, Jack Kemp, Bill Archer and Jerry Pettis. There will also be a White House reception hosted by Julie Eisenhower and a banquet at the end of the Conference honoring Vice President and Mrs. Spiro Agnew and members of the Cabinet and their ladies.

*Washington Daily News* columnist Clare Crawford reports that Maryland Gov. Marvin Mandel is furious at Sen. Hubert Humphrey for showing up at his mother's funeral immediately after announcing that he (HHH) would be entering the Maryland Presidential primary. Humphrey is not close to the Governor and did not know Mrs. Mandel at all.

In direct violation of the Federal Corrupt Practices Act, Sen. George McGovern's campaign operation has sent a fund solicitation letter to a Federal agency. The "Dear Friend" plea for cash was received by the Interior Dept's Bureau of Outdoor Recreation. Such violations of the law are punishable by up to three years in prison, a fine not to exceed $5,000, or both...The *Baltimore Sun's* Adam Clymer reports from Tempe, Arizona that in the recent Democratic scrap there for delegates: "John Lindsay had a smoke-filled room here. But his has wheels and the smoke wasn't tobacco, but marijuana. His campaign staff was busing college students to the polls, providing a keg of beer and letting them bring their own grass..."

## Foot-In-Mouth for Udall

**Quote of the Week:** Muskie's man in Arizona, Rep. Morris Udall, gets jeers and cat-calls from 18-year-olds, Mexican-Americans and Negroes when, in seeking to convince them that the Democratic Party reformers are working he tells them they can either take or leave things because they are "free, white and 21."

7

Monday, Feb. 21, 1972

When asked by CBS's Mike Wallace if he thought Sens. Muskie, Humphrey, McGovern or Mayor John Lindsay were giving aid and comfort to Hanoi with their calls for U.S. withdrawal from Vietnam, AFL-CIO President George Meany replied, "Well, I think that when you make a speech publicly, and you disagree with the President of the United States, who is still the President of the United States, no matter what anyone thinks, who is the Commander-in-Chief, who has this responsibility, who has access to all the information, far more than members of the Senate, and so on and so forth, I think when you're publicly trying to dictate terms to the President of the United States that he should submit to Hanoi, I think you are unconsciously, unwittingly aiding Hanoi."...The Soviet newspaper *Pravda* has characterized as "eloquent testimony" a lengthy diatribe against U.S. foreign policy by Arkansas Sen. William Fulbright published in the *New Yorker* magazine.

Sen. George McGovern has withdrawn a radio commercial using the voice of the late Robert F. Kennedy. McGovern said that the tape would be redone so the listener would know the voice endorsing him was that of RFK and not Teddy Kennedy. All of which prompted one observer to comment: "I have a better idea. Why doesn't McGovern leave the radio commercial as it is and withdraw himself?"

Secretary of Labor J. D. Hodgson and James F. Gates, Jr., National Chairman of the Jobs for Veterans Committee, in a joint letter to 800 of the Nation's top corporate executives have called for intensified effort to provide returning veterans with worthwhile jobs and training opportunities. The bid to private industry followed closely the Labor Department's meeting with 15 top Federal officials to map renewed action of major Federal departments

and agencies in pushing ahead President Nixon's six-point jobs-for-veterans program...Iowa Rep. William J. Scherle writes in his newsletter that those who criticized Agriculture Secretary Earl Butz when he was nominated should acknowledge that he has done far more for the farmer in a few short months than many other Secretaries have done in their entire term of office.

SPEAKING:

Today-Maritime Comm. Chmn. **Bentley**, General Stevedoring Conf., Vancouver, Canada; Counsellor **Finch**, Dartmouth U., Hanover, and Lincoln Day dinner, Keene, N.H.; RNC Chmn. **Dole**, Lincoln Day dinner, Toledo, Ohio; Tues.-HEW Sec. **Richardson**, Nat'l Governors Conf., Wash., D.C. Ag. Sec. **Butz**, Outlook Conf., Wash., D.C.; VA Admin. **Johnson**, Lincoln Day dinner, Des Moines, Iowa; Wed.-Trans. Sec. **Volpe**, Greater Nashua Chamber of Commerce, N.H.; Labor Sec. **Hodgson**, Nat'l Alliance of Business Employment, Wash., D.C., Vice President **Agnew**, Nat'l Governors, Wash., D.C.; Communications chief **Klein**, Chamber of Commerce, Manchester, N.H.; Thurs.-Def. Sec. **Laird**, Nat'l Governors, Wash. D.C.; **Bentley**, Clemson U., S.C.; **Finch**, Assn. of Bay Area Governments, San Francisco; Int. Sec. **Morton**, GOP Exec. Comm., Tallahassee; EPA Dir. **Ruckelshaus**, Lincoln Day dinner, Indianapolis; Fri.-Butz, Agri-Business & Rural Affairs Comm. of U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Wash., D.C.; **Richardson**, GOP function Lincoln City, and City Club of Portland, Ore.; **Dole**, Lincoln Day dinner, Knoxville, Tenn.; Treas. Sec. **Connally**, Mortgage Bankers Assn., Houston; **Hodgson**, Executive Club of Chicago; Sat.-HUD Sec. **Romney**, Fla. Engineering Society, Miami; **Hodgson**, Labor Policy Assn., Williamsburg, Va.; **Butz**, S.C. Jaycees, Charleston, and Va. Agri-Business Council, Richmond.

When changing address, please send us both the old and the new. Permission to use material herein is granted with or without credit to the Committee.

NEWSPAPER

Second class postage
paid at
Washington, D.C.

**Question:** Has the U. S. by this Communique committed itself to withdrawal of all its forces from Taiwan?

**Answer:** We have always maintained forces based on our assessment of the general situation. Our statement is a reiteration of our continuing policy, not a mutual PRC-US decision. The Communique says:

> -- First, with respect to withdrawals, the U.S. affirms the ultimate objective of withdrawal of all U.S. forces from Taiwan but related to the prospect of a peaceful settlement. In other words, our ultimate long-term goal is to return all our forces from Taiwan if there is a peaceful settlement between the two sides.

> -- Second, we will progressively reduce our forces as tensions in the area diminish. Any reduction we make is conditioned on our assessment of progress in reducing tensions.

(FYI: There are approximately 8,000 American military personnel on Taiwan of which two-thirds are related to the Indochina conflict. The remainder are non-combatant, technical personnel, mostly for intelligence purposes.)

**Question:** Why did we not positively reaffirm our defense commitment to the Republic of China?

**Answer:** The joint communique was a significant document between nations which have been hostile and isolated for more than two decades. The issue of Taiwan is a deep emotional one with the Chinese. In the PRC's eyes, the U.S. is presently occupying part of their country. In this context, they did not denounce our treaty in their statement of their own views and we did not reaffirm it specifically.

However, we did affirm our interest in a peaceful solution in the communique and in his briefing on the record in Shanghai before a large PRC and U.S. press contingent, Dr. Kissinger reaffirmed our commitment.

**Question:** Is the general thrust of our statement a message to the Republic of China that they must settle with the People's Republic of China?

**Answer:** No, we have simply reaffirmed that we believe that the Taiwan question should be resolved peacefully. We have stated this many times.

In my report to the Congress, for example, I stated that "a peaceful resolution of this problem by the parties would do much to reduce tension in the Far East. We are not, however, urging either party to follow any particular course." Nothing has changed in our view of that problem.

**Question:** How are our Asian allies reacting to this
solution?

**Answer:** In general, I believe they welcome the visit as a reflection of improved relations which can result in a reduction of tensions throughout Asia. As the communique states, the U.S. and PRC agree that:

- progress toward normalization of relations is in the interest of all countries.

- we both wish to reduce the danger of international conflict.

- significantly, it states that international disputes should be settled without resort to the use or threat of force.

Thus, two powers with very different ideologies after a long period of intense hostility have confirmed that force is not the answer to solving world problems. I believe this is an important step toward achieving greater stability in Asia and the world.

I have sent Assistant Secretary Green to consult the Asian leaders on our discussions with the PRC and I believe they will be even more reassured when these consultations are completed.

Q: Were Vietnam POWs or those Americans being held in the PRC mentioned in the talks?

A: Vietnam was discussed and I am sure you know I would not discuss it without reiterating our concern about American prisoners. As the communique states, the PRC supports the Vietcong position.

As far as our citizens held in the PRC are concerned, this is of course another important concern of mine. The PRC regards their sentences as a domestic legal problem.

[I think on both these problems the greater understanding achieved by the frank exchange of views on our many differences cannot help but make some indirect contribution to solution of these problems. However, I am concerned that any speculation in this regard would only lengthen the process and jeopardize any indirect influence that we might be able to eventually have on these problems.]

**Question:** Are other trips to the PRC planned?

**Answer:** The Communique indicates agreement on the sending of a U. S. representative to Peking from time to time for concrete consultations. We are not ready yet to announce when and who will make the trip, but I believe further visits will help build on the process we have just begun.

**Question:** How will both countries facilitate trade and exchanges in fields such as science, technology, culture, sports, etc.?

**Answer:** A contact will be established within the next two weeks where the details will be worked out.

**Question:** Will the contacts be made in the US?

**Answer:** As you know, the fact that the Republic of China is represented in Washington makes official contacts in the U. S. difficult for Peking. Therefore, it is likely that these contacts will be made in a third country.

**Question:** Is our movement toward the People's Republic of China directed at the Soviet Union?

**Answer:** We have often stated that our developing relationship with the People's Republic of China is not directed against the Soviet Union and I do not believe the People's Republic of China is motivated by the effect a warming of relations with us may have on their dispute with the Soviet Union.

Obviously, a world in which relations between the U. S. and PRC are improved does not conform to the earlier bipolar era. We believe that the steps in the past week represent a concrete step toward building a more stable structure of peace in the world.

**Question:** Who will get the Pandas?

**Answer:** It has not been decided. What are your views?

Perhaps the National Zoo in Washington is the most appropriate
place since it is a gift to all Americans.

**Question:** By expressing our desire for normalization of relations does this imply that we are committed to eventual recognition of the PRC? Do we have a timetable in mind?

**Answer:** We have no time frame in mind for the evolution of our relations. We are only at the beginning of a process which, given the complex difficulties involved, will undoubtedly be slow and gradual.

STATE OF NEW YORK
EXECUTIVE CHAMBER
NELSON A. ROCKEFELLER, GOVERNOR

Ronald Maiorana, Press Secretary
518-GR4-8418 (Albany); 212-JU2-7030 (N.Y.C.)

FOR RELEASE:
UPON DELIVERY, MONDAY

FEBRUARY 28, 1972

STATEMENT OF GOVERNOR NELSON A. ROCKEFELLER

President Nixon deserves tremendous credit for his courage in recognizing and dealing forthrightly with the world's changing realities.

His trip to China achieved its objectives. It represents a major step toward a more peaceful world.

Change is bound to cause uncertainty. However, as the joint communique explicitly pointed out, the U.S. will maintain its commitments to its allies.

The President's goal of achieving a generation of peace must be given a chance. I believe history will record his journey to Peking as a turning point in accomplishing that goal.

- 30 -

FEBRUARY 19, 1972

11

More will be known about the significance of this youth vote after the elections. But we know now that the stage has been set for a shift in political attitudes and responses toward the young by all levels of government. How far that shift will go depends in part, of course, on the number of youth who vote and their reasons for voting. But if the choice between candidates is to be broader than tweedledee or tweedledum, and if government between elections is to operate justly and efficiently, then the second drive centering around citizen action assumes signal importance.

In a dozen states from Washington to Vermont students are signing petitions for the creation of student public interest research groups. PIRGs, as they are called for short, are already underway in Oregon and Minnesota. Composed of lawyers, scientists and citizen organizers, these two PIRGs were established last year after a majority of college students in those two states voted to raise their student fees by $3 per student a year. The money is used to hire full-time researchers and advocates who represent student social concerns in the community, and projects that enlist the energy and talents of students throughout the states.

A representative student board directs these PIRGs as independent institutions, with no connection to any of the schools. Nor do these student research groups get into partisan politics. They focus on community and state problems that need citizens' attention.

The Minnesota student public interest research group, for example, is operating during its first year on a budget of about $200,000. There are four attorneys, two scientists and other young people working full-time on environmental, consumer, property tax, housing and municipal government problems. The group is developing problems for students to research and act upon, often together with older citizens, throughout Minnesota. It is becoming a catalyst for many lively students who have found a way to combine their studies and extracurricular interest with training in recognized community problems.

As the PIRG idea catches on in other states, more students will discover that there doesn't have to be an artificial distinction between students as students and students as citizens. Indeed, there is a mutually enriching relationship between the two roles. For too many years, millions of college students have dissipated their energies on courses and subjects that bored them because of their remoteness from the realities of the times or their lack of pertinence to the great public needs that knowledge should recognize. Boredom or lack of motivation continues to plague campuses across the country in a massive epidemic of wasted talents. What students are beginning to experience is that they get a more thorough education in their field of study if they can work on investigating and solving problems that challenge both their minds and their sense of values.

This is the appeal of the PIRG idea. It provides a

continuing opportunity for students to connect their growing knowledge to public problems and solutions in the society. Science and engineering students can work on pollution prevention projects that challenge their technical knowledge and their sense of what science and engineering should be doing for human betterment. Political science and economics students will be able to test textbook principles in the context of everyday consumer or governmental problems and develop a deeper understanding of factual and theoretical research that relates to people.

If there is one thing formal education should give all students, it is an opportunity to become proficient citizens. Citizenship can reflect many viewpoints by many people. But its common ground is time and energy spent by people to better their society with the skills and values they have. Compared with earlier generations, it takes an extraordinarily long time for young people in America to grow up today. Preparation for so-called adulthood is taking longer and longer and the impatience of many young people reflects this inordinate stretchout in training. It is useful for students to acquire the skills of citizenship at the same time they acquire the formal tools of learning.

Ralph Nader

## The Nixon Watch

### Packing for Peking

"I go to Peking without illusions," the President said last week. He also goes with confidence that matters have been arranged so that there will be no surprises for him. The surprises, if any, will be for the world and for the American electorate, in the shape of some unexpected claims of substantial accomplishment. Mr. Nixon is smart enough to know that the sheen of the trip itself, the first visit of a US President to China and the astonishing reach of this President for normal relations with Communist China, will have lost its glitter by voting time next November unless he is able at the end of the journey and in the following months to say and show that he brought away from Peking and Hangchow and Shanghai something more than the sight of him on television at home, being greeted by Chou En-lai and Mao Tse-tung and sitting down with them to discuss the making of a different and better world. The President reflected his certainty that he will have something more to claim and show, and indicated the enormous care with which the trip has been prepared, when he said in his third annual foreign policy report last week that at his meetings with the Chinese "we will each know clearly where the

12

THE NEW REPUBLIC

other stands on the issues that divide us."

A sense of assurance that nothing can go wrong, that no sour notes of anything more than obvious and acknowledged differences between the two governments will be allowed to mar the adventure, was evident at the White House during the days of final preparation for the President's departure. When staff colleagues of Henry Kissinger remarked to him that everything must have been pretty well set in advance, he replied, "Of course. Why else do you think I'd be as relaxed as I am?"

He was all that relaxed because he and Chou En-lai had explored with each other every issue that the Chinese and the President intend to bring up. Nixon jarred Kissinger a bit by saying during a CBS television interview in early January that Kissinger had discussed the sensitive question of North Vietnam's American prisoners during both of his preliminary visits to Peking in July and October. Once that fact was out, it was not denied at the White House that Kissinger and Chou had gone through what amounted to a thorough rehearsal of the summit discussions. The rehearsal was necessary, in the first place, in order for each party to the visit to be certain beyond foreseeable doubt that the Peking government would not embarrass Mr. Nixon by withdrawing its invitation and that he would not embarrass the Chinese by canceling his acceptance. There was also at this stage, one may guess with reason, at least a tacit understanding between Kissinger and Chou that neither government's interests would be served if the principals—Chou, Mao and Nixon—risked confronting each other with attitudes that had not been anticipated and prepared for on each side. It doesn't follow from this that the Nixon talks need be empty farces, designed only or mainly to justify the televised spectacle to be transmitted from China to the US by instant satellite. Kissinger could prepare the way and has, more completely than he wishes to say. But only the President can confirm to Chou and Mao the Nixon attitudes that Kissinger outlined to them in advance; and only the President can appraise for himself the Chinese attitudes that Kissinger reported to him. Despite the cynicism that the elaborate preparations and the convenient timing with this spring's party primaries and the developing presidential campaign induce, I am persuaded that neither the Peking Chinese on their side nor the President on his side would have undertaken so drastic a turn from their own and their governments' past patterns of policy and behavior if there were not a serious intention to seek what Nixon last week called "a solid beginning" and a mutual quest for "common ground on which to build a more constructive relationship."

Only one substantive consequence of the visit was predicted last week by Kissinger at two of his increasingly frequent on-the-record press conferences in Washington. It was agreement upon a limited form

of diplomatic communication, short of formal recognition of each government by the other but enough to demonstrate progress toward the "normalization of relations" that Nixon has been saying he wants. Finding agreed language to announce this much should be fairly simple. The difficulty foreseen at the White House before the President's journey was in finding words in which to announce and explain tangible understandings that the Peking government is unlikely to want set forth in tangible terms. Such an understanding will, if Nixon's hopes are fulfilled, have to do with the Republic of China on Taiwan and its relationship with the People's Republic on the mainland. A modest success can be claimed by the President if he, either alone or in a joint expression with the Peking government, is able to indicate at the end of the visit that the Chinese Communists go along with his proposition that "the ultimate relationship between Taiwan and the mainland" is a matter for "peaceful resolution" by the two Chinas. Much could be made by the President and his spokesmen, possibly more than actual discussions and resultant understandings warrant, of the barest indication that the Peking leadership agrees with Nixon that a negotiated settlement of the Indochina war is preferable to continued and abortive warfare. The prospect of Communist China's participation in a multinational conference aimed at neutralizing and stabilizing the whole of Indochina was discussed by Kissinger during his preliminary talks in Peking and it, too, could be the subject of intangible hints at a tangible understanding.

A participant in a recent White House staff discussion of Nixon's China policy recalls that the official who conducted the session opened it by saying, "We know why we are going to Peking. The really interesting question is, why do the Chinese Communists want us to come? We don't know why, but we have some assumptions that suggest answers."

The first of two assumptions then stated was that the Peking leadership is deathly afraid of the Soviet Union and its nuclear power. The official said that he can imagine the Peking leaders imagining the men in the Kremlin ripping pages from their calendars at the end of each day – here the official made a ripping motion – and muttering to themselves that the Chinese have had another day to build up their nuclear arsenal for a strike at the Soviet Union. A leadership so preoccupied with fears may think it altogether possible that a day may come when the Kremlin leadership decides to obliterate China's centers of nuclear power with a preemptive strike. May it not (the official continued) be supposed that a leadership in such a state of apprehension has concluded that accommodation with the US is not only worthwhile but perhaps essential for survival? Not with any thought of protective military alliance – that is not conceivable – but worthwhile for whatever comfort an accommodation and the

FEBRUARY 19, 1972

13

friendship that it connotes would give the Chinese and for whatever pause it may give the Kremlin leadership.

The second assumption thrown out for discussion was that the Chinese somehow perceive in accommodation with the US a means of preserving and increasing their ability to influence events in Asia and particularly in Southeast Asia. With some exceptions (Korea; the brief invasion of India in the 1960s), the Chinese have been meticulous in their care to keep their military forces within their borders and to influence events beyond their borders by nonmilitary means. Witness the fact that their intervention in the Vietnam war has been limited to material aid. Just how accommodation with the US could enhance Chinese Communist influence in neighboring Asia was not made clear. Other assumptions, involving such factors as China's fear of Soviet political penetration and of a Japan in alliance with the US, didn't figure in the particular discussion. But the ones that did are consistent with the underlying Nixon-Kissinger calculation that the approach of the US toward accommodation in its fundamental interest can succeed only if the same accommodation is believed by the leaders of Communist China to be in their fundamental interest. Identifying the points where the interests of the two nations can be merged or at least reconciled is the essence of the President's task and hope during his visit to Peking.

John Osborne

Mr. Osborne will be one of six magazine correspondents accompanying the President on his trip to China this month.

## Mr. Heath's "Vietnam"
## After Derry and Newry

### London

The bloodless nature of last week's massive protest march in the Northern Ireland border town of Newry undoubtedly came as a personal relief to British ministers, but it also marked a total political defeat for the policy Mr. Heath and his home secretary, Mr. Maudling, have been doggedly pursuing ever since internment was launched last summer. That policy even has a quasi-official label. It is called "getting on top of the gunmen" - and until last month there were some (though not many) who thought it had a reasonable chance of success. Now there are none. For what Newry and the tragedy of Londonderry a week before conclusively demonstrated is that while the British army was fighting a battle on one front the real war was going on somewhere else.

Some 750 rounded-up detainees count for very little

when measured against the wholesale alienation of Northern Ireland's half-million-strong minority Catholic population. In the last few days that is a truth that has become apparent to virtually every English newspaper. Some, like the nation's best-selling daily, *The Mirror*, have started to call openly for the withdrawal of British troops. Others, like *The Observer*, have begun to argue that only by inviting the Irish Republic to share with it the burden of security duties in Ulster can the British now hope to rescue anything from a bleak and desperate situation. But in all the clamor for new bold initiatives one body of opinion has remained singularly unmoved. That body of opinion is represented by Mr. Heath and his government. Far from considering any new options, they are actually grinding forward with the same old formula of arrests and prosecutions. Summonses have already been issued against 26 of the leaders of the Newry march – summonses that if upheld in the courts will result in mandatory, six-month prison sentences. There is thus a real danger that the Heath government could soon find itself in the classic colonial dilemma of having locked up and put in jail virtually everyone it needs to talk to in order to have any hope of bringing a political settlement within reach. Yet the leaders of Northern Ireland's Catholic population are not of course in the same position as a Nehru, a Kenyatta or even a Makarios.

The whole nub of the difficulty is that they are the representatives not of a majority but of a minority. No new political constitution – however ingeniously contrived – can possibly bring them power within the confines of Ulster as it is at present constituted. What the British government undoubtedly hoped it was going to be able to get away with was offering the Northern Ireland Catholics not control of any new government, but rather a guaranteed voice within it. There is some reason to believe that Mr. Heath is still working on a plan by which particular ministers in any future Northern Ireland government would be directly elected by their own communities – thus avoiding the permanent submerged minority position that Catholics have occupied in Northern Ireland ever since partition 50 years ago.

Conceivably, if such a plan had been wheeled out months ago it might have had some small chance of being accepted. After the killings in Londonderry it can have none. Only the one thing that British governments have traditionally proclaimed is nonnegotiable – the border – now seems to offer any hope of getting negotiations started. There are a few – though not many – members of Mr. Heath's government who seem prepared to recognize this. Furtive talk can be heard both at Westminster and at Stormont of cession of territory, even of transfers of blocks of population. The danger here is that it is inevitably a halfway-house solution, one that would be bound to be regarded on both sides as the start of a process rather than the end

14

THE NEW REPUBLIC

of it. But an intimation of a readiness to consider such a proposal could still be the price that Mr. Heath will have to pay if the present hopeless impasse is ever to be broken. Perhaps the most dangerous aspect of the whole post-Derry position is that at the moment the Westminster and Dublin governments are scarcely on speaking terms.

At private briefings for senior journalists Mr. Heath goes out of his way to make it clear that he does not find Mr. Lynch, the Republic's premier, "impressive." In turn, Mr. Lynch infuriates the British government by refusing to do anything to discourage such technically illegal manifestations as the Derry and Newry marches. Yet the harsh truth remains that it is only in a dialogue between London and Dublin that there can ever be any hope of rationalizing Ireland's present political structure.

Any move to get such talks started would certainly involve imperiling the position of Mr. Faulkner, Ulster's present premier. But that need not necessarily lead to his replacement by a Protestant or Orange extremist. The precondition of political progress of any kind is that Westminster should now replace Stormont as the responsible government of Ulster. It may be difficult for Mr. Heath to talk to Mr. Lynch; it is all but impossible for Mr. Faulkner now to do so. "Direct

rule" from Westminster has never been attractive to British politicians of either party. But what was a policy of last resort is now beginning to look more and more like the essential first step toward any form of eventual settlement.

Unfortunately it is a step that will be much harder for Mr. Heath to take than it would have been for Mr. Wilson. "The Orange Card" in British politics may have lost some of the potency that it had in the days of Carson and Lord Randolph Churchill, but there is still a distinct political bloodline linking the unionists at Stormont to the Conservatives at Westminster. Ulster was a Conservative creation - it had no part in the original home-rule bills of Mr. Gladstone or indeed of Mr. Asquith - and there is still a tendency today for right-wingers to identify with the "loyalist" Protestants just as left-wingers ally themselves instinctively with the Catholic underdog.

Mr. Heath, to do him justice, has never been a sentimental or nostalgic politician. The real danger lies elsewhere - in his tendency toward stubbornness and obstinacy. What he is now being required to face is that his original policy of first winning a military victory against the IRA and talking only afterward is no longer a practical proposition. Ulster may not yet be Britain's Vietnam but it is already Mr. Heath's.

Anthony Howard

Old Politics, New Technology

# Hubert's Computer

by Paul R. Wieck

The man at the mike was 20 pounds slimmer, clad in a conservative blue with flare trousers and wide lapels, a reddish tint in his hair. His speech, sparing and to the point, was delivered in tones that sometimes bordered on the somber. For Sen. Hubert Humphrey, the speech announcing his candidacy for the Democratic presidential nomination was mercifully short, itself a signal that one of the most exuberant, talkative men in American politics had taken careful stock of his assets and liabilities and was determined to minimize the latter in what could be his "Last Hurrah" or a new beginning.

Hundreds of enthusiasts were crammed into a small room at the historic Poor Richard's Club in Philadelphia. The senator and his wife waited outside in a

limousine until it was time to appear. Once on the podium, he looked out over a sea of middle-aged faces heavily splashed with party pros - handsome, silver-haired ex-Mayor James Tate, still a big figure in the Philadelphia machine; a full quota of overweight labor bosses; established black leaders of Humphrey's own generation.

The first hint that Humphrey planned to refurbish his image came with the selection of a trio of young men, all unknown nationally, to fill the top spots in his organization. Two came east from Minneapolis after playing key roles in Humphrey's convincing 1970 comeback (a majority of over 200,000 against popular GOP Representative Clark McGregor)-attor-