Kissinger: Concern for human rights
must include helping stop communism

NY Times News Service

WASHINGTON — Henry A. Kissinger warned Thursday night that the growing political strength of Communist parties in Western Europe poses a grave threat to the future of the Western world, and he urged concerted efforts to prevent Communist election victories in Italy, France and Spain.

The former secretary of state did

not take direct issue with the more
relaxed approach of the Carter ad-
ministration toward the phenomenon
called Eurocommunism, but he
seemed to press President Carter to
broaden his concern over human
rights to include concern over
possible Communist victories at the
polls.

"Human rights is not an abstraction concerned only with judicial

procedures and unrelated to basic
questions of political and geopolitical
structure," he said. "We cannot fail to
reckon the setback to European
freedom that will result if Communist
minorities gain decisive influence in
European politics — we must not
close our eyes to the effect on freedom
throughout the world if the global
balance tips against the West."

The text of Kissinger's speech to a
conference on Italy and Eurocom-
munism here was made available
Thursday afternoon. The conference
was sponsored by the American
Enterprise Institute for Public Policy
Research and the Hoover Institution
on War, Revolution and Peace.

In essence, Kissinger repeated at
length his often-stated concern as
secretary that if Communists were
allowed to play significant roles in
Western European governments,
particularly in Italy, France or Spain,
this could have long-term eroding
effects on the whole alliance.

During the election campaign, the
Democrats tended to criticize
Kissinger's tough stand.

Carter, as President, said last
month that the United States favored
the election in Europe of non-
Communists but "it's not up to us to
tell other people now to vote or how to
choose their leaders or who those
leaders should be."

The President also said that the
best way to prevent a shift toward
communism was to insure that
democratic governments were open
to change and sensitive to the needs of
people.

9/8/77

MODESTO, CALIF.
BEE
D. 45,000 S. 48,000

JUN 10 1977

Two Heavyweights

7/8/77
Press Intelligence, Inc.

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20001

Front Page
Edit Page
Other Page

RICHMOND, VIRGINIA
TIMES-DISPATCH

M - 139,358

S - 194,916

JUN 13 1977

By coincidence, two of the top-
ranked intellectual heavyweights
in the foreign-policy division
stepped up to face off in different
arenas Thursday and delivered
telling verbal blows to basic
assumptions behind Carter ad-
ministration policy.

New York Sen. Daniel P. Moynihan, a Democrat and former ambassador to the United Nations, made the most direct attack. In a commencement speech at Baruch College in New York, he replied to a Jimmy Carter commencement address at Notre Dame University last month in which the President, outlining his foreign policy, downgraded the importance of containing communism and of allying with right-wing governments for that purpose.

In reply to Mr. Carter's
idealistic vision of cooperation
with the Communist world, Mr.
Moynihan said, "It is as if, with no
further consideration, we should
divert our attention from the
central political struggle of our
time—that between liberal
democracy and totalitarian com-
munism—and focus instead on
something else."

The senator praised the
President's commitment to
human rights but emphasized that
it "must not be allowed to divert us
from the reality of the ideological
and military competition with the
Soviet Union which continues and,
if anything, escalates."

In remarks to a conference spon-
sored by the American Enterprise
Institute, former Secretary of
State Henry A. Kissinger also pick-
ed up on the theme of human rights
and the threat of communism. He

expressed his criticisms of the pre-
sent administration more oblique-
ly than Mr. Moynihan, but his
target was clearly Mr. Carter's
foreign-policy emphases.

"Human rights is not an abstrac-
tion concerned only with judicial
procedures and unrelated to basic
questions of political and
geopolitical structure," Mr.
Kissinger declared. "We cannot
fail to reckon the setback to Euro-
pean freedom that will result if
Communist minorities gain
decisive influence in European
politics; we must not close our
eyes to the effect on freedom
throughout the world if the global
balance tips against the West."

Mr. Kissinger viewed with
alarm, as he did when in office, the
possibility of Communist electoral
victories in Italy, France and
Spain and he said the U. S. must
avoid giving the impression that
the victory of Eurocommunism
would make "little or no difference
to our own attitudes and policies."
While Mr. Carter has said that the
U. S. would prefer the continuation
in office of democratic parties in
Europe, he has taken a rather
detached, whatever-will-be-will-
be view of the situation, which
could indeed give Europeans the
impression that the U. S. doesn't
care greatly if the Communist par-
ties triumph.

Behind the diplomatic language,
what heavyweights Moynihan and
Kissinger are saying is: Isn't it
ironic that Jimmy Carter, the
great crusader for human rights, is
so neutral on the spread of a
totalitarian movement that has
oppressed the rights of more
humans than any system in the
history of mankind?

CONTENTS

[L]

WHAT'S STOPPING THE WORLD?

It's the economic forecasting season. So what is in the stars for the world? Carter has no reason to stop smiling—the US economy is continuing to grow slowly but steadily. But tired old Europe, with the exception of West Germany, slumbers on. Outlook: uncertain still.

Page 17

WHY THEY PICK ON HENRY

To the Secret Service, he was "woodcutter", she was "woodlark" and they lived in the "woodshed". The US president was "search-light", the vice-president was "sandstorm" and the world was their oyster. Now he is Henry Kissinger, counsellor, commentator and consultant; she is Nancy, researcher. Richard Nixon nurses his spleen in San Clemente and Rocky (Hiya!) feller ponders it all from the plush of Pocantico. The oyster is now a bit gritty. Six months after leaving office, Kissinger still lives in the glare of publicity. In POINT PROFILE, we look at the man who kept the peace in the Middle East but who is now being blamed for pursuing the war in Vietnam.

Page 29

THE FRONT LINE OF STRESS

Stress, one of the factors in heart disease, no longer affects just the developed world. The World Health Organisation (WHO) has embarked on $5 million programme to combat neuroses in the Third World. WHO singles out Africa, notably the fraught so-called "front-line" states, as areas where cases of stress are multiplying fast. Meanwhile in the US a school of thought is growing up that believes that heart trouble can be traced back to childhood. It is the reason many children visiting the doctor are having their blood pressure checked and blood samples taken as a matter of course. "If you can identify in childhood the major risk factors then you may be able to reduce the alarming excess of cardiac events these children suffer when they grow older," says one doctor engaged in research in this field.

Page 42

MULTINATIONAL MONSTERS?

The multinationals' headquarters tower into the sky—monuments to enterprise, say their backers; monuments to exploitation, say their critics. Despite charitable works and expensive public relations campaigns, the multinationals retain a bad image. When they move into a country, they are accused of taking profits away from the underprivileged. When they try to move out, they are accused of adding to unemployment. On the eve of a major report by OECD, Robin Kent looks at the profitable "no-win situation" of the multinationals.

Page 36

RETURN TO UNEMPLOYMENT

The Portuguese economy, creaking under a mounting deficit, has been forced to absorb some 750,000 *retornados* from Mozambique since the break-up of its African empire. Another 20,000 whose two-year work contracts expired in June are also on their way home. Portugal, with 18 per cent employment, can ill afford this influx; and since many of them are managers, technicians and skilled workers, Mozambique can ill afford the exodus. In *POINT ANALYSTS*, we examine the Portuguese and Mozambican economies—and look at the *retornados* problem from both sides.

Page 26

African Background

OAU: The big men meet..................30

OAU agrees on mercenaries..................31

Germany looks at Africa..................32

South Africa: democracy

fades further..................................33

Rhodesia: guerillas grow..................33

Zaire: was France conned?..................34

Tanzania's economic

war on Kenya..................................34

African Diary..................................35

Analysis

Mozambique and Portugal..................26

Books

OPEC: breaks

the Seven Sisters..........................45

A Jesuit's vision..........................45

Business and Finance

Multinationals' image..................36

World Bank

audits the poor..................................38

Communist oil shares..................38

Tennis: the money racket..................39

Business Roundup..........................40

Editorials..................................23

Last Word

Mikes kicks legal asses..................46

Letters..................................7

Medicine

Children's hearts, river blindness,

mental health..................................42

New Technology..........................41

Press Opinions..........................8

Profile

I wonder who's Kissinger now............29

Washington Dateline

Computerised diplomacy..................13

World Exchange Rates..................40

World in Depth

Israel: the US hardens..................9

EEC: herring pickle..................10

OPEC: oil rift heats..................10

Vietnam: the refugees

on the oceans..................................11

West Germany: fears of

student violence..........................12

Slowdown on whale

killing..................................12

Paraguay: dam nuisance..................13

Britain: a strike splits

a nation..................................14

Thailand: drug swap..................15

US radio:

news or propaganda?..................15

Food: world grain

bank..................................21

JULY 11, 1977 TO THE POINT INTERNATIONAL

6

[LC]

# Hole in your image, dear Henry

It sounded like a voice from the past, which it was of course, though not the too distant past. Henry Kissinger's warning on the rise of Eurocommunism was his most telling political contribution since quitting as Secretary of State. At almost the same time as President Jimmy Carter was telling Americans they were now mature enough, secure enough, not to let a few little ole communists worry them, Kissinger was saying America must do it's utmost to stop the Berlinguers and Marchais.

If Kissinger's counsel had the ring of last year's thinking about it, his argument was compelling; and at least he did not choose *Playboy* in which to postulate it. "One need not be a cynic to wonder at the decision of the French Communists, traditionally the most Stalinist party in Western Europe, to renounce the Soviet concept of dictatorship of the proletariat without a single dissenting voice among the 1,700 delegates, as they did at their party congress in February, when all previous party congresses had endorsed the same dictatorship of the prolateriat by a similar unanimous vote of 1,700 to none," he said.

Kissinger has always had a knack of putting his hands on the facts when emotion is threatening to run away with the argument. In the Middle East and in Africa, Kissinger brought belligerents to the table and set about finding the middle ground, or creating it if there was none. "A good negotiator," Kissinger told the London *Observer* in a candid interview recently, "is somebody who can give others the confidence to move in what they must each perceive to be their own interest, and since they are responsible for the future of their country, you would be reckless if you try to trick them about that."

But how do you do that with protagonists as sundered as the Jews and Arabs? "What you can do is to affect the margins of their perception, and I considered that my principal role," he said in the same interview.

For the former Secretary of State, six months after leaving office, every situation has its own irony and absurdity. Looking back, he says: "Of course, as my time from office goes on, my infallibility increases geometrically." And Kissinger's past is beginning to rear up. Kissinger the master negotiator, Kissinger the peacemaker for some has become Kissinger the architect of the Vietnam war policy. One example is the academic fury aroused by Columbia University's offer to endow a chair in diplomacy for him.

Faculty members and students sharply attacked the idea, saying the university was engaged in an unseemly chase after a celebrity. To endow a chair such as the one proposed would cost $1-2 million, and since most of it was expected to come from Kissinger's long-time benefactor, former Vice President Nelson

## POINT PROFILE

Rockefeller, it would compromise the school's academic integrity.

The pro-Kissinger elements drew a parallel to the free speech issues raised by the case of Dr William Shockley, the Nobel prize-winning physicist who espouses controversial theories about connections between race and

intelligence. Dr Shockley was denied permission to speak at several campuses.

Professor Seymour Melmen, of Columbia's engineering school, a Kissinger opponent and left-wing activist, said: "This is nothing like the Shockley case. No one is denying him a right to speak. If he were invited here I would be delighted and I would go. Fundamentally, the question is what do we do in this society with those who were primarily responsible for the Vietnam war?"

Another radical, H. Bruce Franklin, now professor of English at Rutgers University,

wrote in the *New York Times*: "Rather than giving this chair to a man whose theories were proved to be nonsensical, why not give it to one of those political scientists who demonstrated as early as 1965 that the Indo-China war would end with the military and political defeat of the US."

An ad hoc group of Columbia students formed to oppose those attempting to prevent Kissinger's appointment termed the campaign "a crude form of McCarthyism."

In the event none of this mattered, Kissinger accepted a one-year appointment as Professor of Diplomacy in Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service in Washington DC. Aides said he had decided on Georgetown for geographic and personal reasons.

Critics savage him not only as the chief architect of America's war in Asia, but for his passion for secrecy, his sanction of illegal surveillance of his own aides and newspapers, his icy disdain for human rights, his Chilean policy, his belated attention to Africa. All are gone now but not forgotten in any assessment of a man not yet turned 54, whose panache — his opponents called it *chutzpe* — captured headlines worldwide.

His supporters cite his scholarly record at Harvard, his eight years as National Security Advisor and Secretary of State and point to him as the prime planner and moving force behind the opening to China, the thaw with the Soviet Union, the tortuous effort for peace in the Middle East and Rhodesia. Kissinger himself feels he helped to solve the problem of preserving "the American spirit" and "the American commitments around the world" as he planned the disengagement of more than one half million Americans from Vietnam.

Now more relaxed, leaner and more tanned, Kissinger spends his mornings in a well-guarded downtown Washington office, and his afternoons in a specially reserved room in the Library of Congress. He researches his book to be written for Little, Brown and Company at a reported $2 million.

He meets with colleagues from Georgetown where he is a visiting and acts on occasion as a foreign policy consultant to the National Broadcasting Company. For a reported $1.5 million he serves as vice chairman of the Chase Manhattan banks international advisory committee.

He and Nancy go out for dinner often, on occasion to the White House. He spoke to the US Chamber of Commerce at a meeting down the street for a fee of $5,000, and to a group of IBM executives in Bermuda (fee unknown).

Is he laying down the foundation for a return to public office? Possibly, admirers say. Kissinger, for the moment, says nothing. Except, the other day, looking back at his career in diplomacy and government, he said with his usual mockery: "I did no more than any other genius would have done".

29

[L.C.]

# Kissinger Reportedly Unaware Of Neutron Weapons Decision

By Walter Pincus

Washington Post Staff Writer

Former Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger was not aware of the Ford administration's decision last November to produce a new generation of neutron weapons for use by NATO forces, according to informed sources.

Kissinger, according to these sources, has said that difficult diplomatic problems would be raised by deployment to NATO countries of neutron artillery shells and missile warheads designed to kill enemy forces primarily by radiation and thus reduce the collateral blast and thermal damage to Western Europe and towns adjacent to a battlefield.

Kissinger's reported concerns were echoed yesterday by a White House aide who said U.S. briefings of NATO allies on the neutron, or enhanced radiation, weapons last year found the West Germans "not tremendously enthusiastic."

With current nuclear weapons, the general public understanding in Europe is that they would be used in East Germany or other Communist countries.

"The neutron weapon decision," one Capitol Hill aide said yesterday, "will open up something kept under the rug —we're going to fight any tactical nuclear battle on West German soil."

In last week's Senate debate, which ended with a vote for funds for the neutron weapons, supporters argued that since the weapons could be used in allied territory, they were more credible deterrents.

Last week, when the Carter administration was pushing successfully for Senate approval of neutron weapon production money, NATO Commander Gen. Alexander M. Haig said the allies had given the neutron weapons "enthusiastic support."

A spokesman for the West German embassy yesterday took issue with Haig's remarks, saying, "I could not agree as far as the German side is concerned."

"Public discussion only now is picking up steam, and there is no clear-cut opinion yet."

During West German Chancellor Helmut Schmidt's visit to Washington last week, he twice ducked reporters' public questions on the neutron weapons. Both times he said more study was needed before any deployment took place.

On Sunday, Egon Bahr, executive secretary of the ruling Socialist Democratic Party, wrote in the party's newspaper that plans to produce a neutron weapon were "a symbol of mental perversion." It was the first critical comment on the issue by a major political figure in the Bonn coalition.

As long as the decision to produce and deploy neutron weapons was secret, there was no pressure to deal with the foreign policy implications of the weapons.

A White House spokesman emphasized yesterday that the neutron artillery shells and Lance missile warheads had been classified secret primarily "to protect nuclear weapons design" and not to hide their production from the U.S. or European public.

He noted, however, that in the past the United States has kept secret its deployment of nuclear weapons "because of their impact on the host government... Some have traditionally shown sensitivity to the idea of our nuclear weapons there."

Kissinger reportedly believes that sensitivity would be more severe with the neutron weapons since they are specifically planned for use on allied soil.

He reportedly has said his decision on whether the weapons should be produced would hinge on weighing the additional deterrent value they create against the diplomatic problems they raise.

The interagency discussions that

preceded last year's Ford administration production decision reportedly did not center on whether conventional or neutron weapons should be built to meet the threat of Soviet tank forces in Central Europe.

"The State Department was always attentive to the basic deployment problem," a White House participant in the discussions said yesterday, "but Kissinger would not have been brought into the production decision. He was aware of the concept, however."

The emphasis, both in the White House process and in U.S. briefings to the NATO Planning Group, which is concerned with nuclear weapons, was "on numbers and safety features," an aide said, with less emphasis on the radiation features.

The NATO participants, which this source said were at the defense minister level, "were enthusiastic about the numbers of weapons to be produced, not what kind of weapons they were."

"They liked modernizing," the source said, "but that doesn't mean they were crazy about enhanced radiation."

Publicity about the new neutron weapons has forced the Carter administration to conduct a special study of

the "questions [that] production and development of these [neutron] warheads pose," a White House aide said yesterday.

Senior policy officials from the State Department along with officials of the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency will be consulted, he said, although the primary agencies involved are the Defense Department and the Energy Research and Development Administration, which builds nuclear warheads.

The National Security Council will prepare the final report for the President by Aug. 15. Carter is to make his production decision after reviewing that study.

Under current planning, a decision to deploy the weapons, even if Carter decides to go ahead, will not be discussed officially with NATO allies until next year.

Full production of the neutron artillery shells and Lance warhead is not scheduled to begin until July, 1979. If an unexpected snag should develop during the deployment discussion, production could be held up.

"We wouldn't go ahead if we couldn't send them to Europe," an administration official said yesterday. "We certainly don't want them here."

The Washington Star

Wednesday, July 20, 1977

# Nixon Gave Hanoi Only a 'Ballpark Figure,' Kissinger Testifies

Associated Press

Former President Richard M. Nixon's private letter to Hanoi in 1973 pledging unconditional aid in the range of $3.25 billion was not a secret promise, but rather a "ballpark figure," according to Nixon's foreign affairs impressario Henry A. Kissinger.

Furthermore, Kissinger told a House subcommittee yesterday, for Hanoi to insist on such aid now after gobbling up South Vietnam is an "absurity" and for the United States to agree would be "carrying masochism to the extreme."

The former secretary of state testified on the controversy over whether the Nixon administration unequivocally promised Hanoi aid, without telling Congress about it, in exchange for Hanoi's signing of the 1973 Geneva accords, then failed to keep its promise.

The letter, whose existence was revealed by North Vietnam two years ago to a visiting House delegation, stunned the legislators and fueled a controversy which has continued to the present. A copy of the letter itself was made public only a few months ago.

KISSINGER SAID yesterday North Vietnam wanted American negotiators to agree in 1973 to massive postwar aid and refused to believe that any such program would need the approval of Congress.

## If Hill OKs, U.S. Ready

## To Sell F15s to Saudis

The administration has tentatively approved the sale of sophisticated F15 fighters to Saudi Arabia but has yet to prepare a formal notification for Congress, where stiff opposition can be expected.

The deal would reportedly involve 45 of the first-line fighters and 15 of the aircraft as trainers.

The Saudis have been pressing the United States to make good on a Ford administration promise of F15s that was made after the Saudis could not be interested in the smaller, simpler, single-engined F16.

The White House yesterday acknowledged that the sale had reached the decision stage, but said no final decision has yet been made.

Word of the pending sale surfaced just when

"Watching the general nature of congressmen in public, they could not believe Congress was anything but a docile instrument of the administration. They told us Congress was nothing but a rubber stamp and that this was a subterfuge," Kissinger said.

To disabuse them of that notion, a 50-page document describing the U.S. constitutional process was provided to Hanoi officials, according to Kissinger. It explained that not only did Congress approve all spending, it "traditionally authorizes and appropriates considerably less than the amount which the President recommends and requests."

Quoting lawmakers' speeches, the paper also observed pointedly that "there has been growing resistance to foreign assistance in the Congress in recent years. Skepticism has been voiced over aid to Indochina by many of the most powerful members of Congress. The President has stated that he will make a major effort."

THE DOCUMENT was made public yesterday.

The Paris peace accords signed in January 1973 contained a provision for U.S. postwar aid, and Nixon told North Vietnam's Premier Pham Van Dong in a private letter that the United States would contribute reconstruction aid "without any political conditions."

The aid would "fall in the range of" $3.25 billion,

with another $1 billion to $1.5 billion in other assistance possibly tacked on, Nixon said, but the actual amounts would be negotiated by a Joint Economic Committee and approved via the "constitutional process" of each country — meaning U.S. congressional sanction.

Whether the lesson in the U.S. political process made an impression on the North Vietnamese is unknown, but no aid deal was concluded.

The Paris accords for which Kissinger shared the Nobel Peace Prize began to break down. By late July, he said, Hanoi's violations became so regular "we concluded there was no basis for giving economic aid and so stopped the work of the Joint Economic Committee."

CONGRESS WAS not told about the letter, he said, because the matter of postwar aid to Hanoi never reached the stage of a formal proposal by the Nixon administration.

Although the Carter administration is attempting to "put the past behind us" and move toward restoring normal relations with Vietnam's Communist regime, it has taken the position that any aid understandings connected with the Paris accords were long since nullified by the violations of that pact. Kissinger strongly endorsed this position and added that aid should not be considered until North Vietnam gives a full accounting of Americans missing in Indochina.

—Associated Press

Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger tells a House panel that for Hanoi to insist on aid after gobbling up South Vietnam is an "absurdity."

BOOK
CASE
ALE
$75 ea
or $199)

Canadian elm veneer are 3 for $199 while singly, $75. Each unit is 6 ft. tall, 30" deep. Easy to assemble to oil finish or shelves adjustable.

Sons: Use BankAmerican
large or Central Charge

RIGETOWN

N. W. Tel: 333 7737

KVILLE

1st Plaza Tel: 881 1220

EYS CROSSROADS

Burg Pike Tel: 820 3262

INGFIELD MALL

b Tel: 971 3380

CHESTER

Cherson St. Tel: 667 2190

THURSDAY, FRIDAY, SATURDAY

Korvettes

The All-Star Game's over and done with...but the All-Star Values continue at Korvettes! We're still in there pitching...and for the next 3 days you can bat 1.000 with savings all over the store!

STAR
SALES

# Kissinger: Washington's 'invisible eminence'

By Godfrey Sperling Jr.
Staff correspondent of
The Christian Science Monitor

Washington

Henry Kissinger is an almost invisible eminence in this city. The power of his presence is evidenced by the way his opinions surface even as he seems to be making efforts to keep a low profile.

It has become known that the former secretary of state holds these views:

1. That former President Gerald R. Ford and he virtually had reached a nuclear-arms agreement with the Soviets but were pressured out of going through with it because of Ronald Reagan's hard-line campaign position and the likelihood that Sen. Henry M. Jackson would stand in the way of Senate approval.

Several months ago Dr. Kissinger told reporters he had been 90 percent toward summation of such a pact. Now he discloses that Mr. Ford and he actually "had it" but were unable to nail agreement down for internal political reasons.

2. He thinks the Soviets will get over their touchiness on the human-rights issue in time.

3. He is carefully avoiding any criticism of President Carter. He feels that it is probably good that the Democrats are in control of foreign policy now - that the Republicans had carried it forward as far as they could and that it is probably good that the Democrats now have a try at it.

It seems clear that Dr. Kissinger would help President Carter get an arms-limitation treaty through Congress. That is, he would testify in support of it unless it turns out to be, in his view, completely outlandish and unworkable.

4. In the Mideast, it seems that Dr. Kissinger

By R. Norman Matheny, staff photographer

## Kissinger: his views still surface

sees no early final solution. Instead, he sees the task there is one of damping down fires, buying time.

But he does not see the setting up of a Palestinian state as practical. He does not see how such a state could sustain itself - that it would inevitably fall into the orbit of others, probably Syria, maybe the Soviet Union. Thus, he thinks that for this reason alone the Israelis simply could not accept the setting up of a new Palestinian state.

5. He thinks that all things considered it was better that the Democrats won the election, particularly since a Ford victory might have involved a very close result with a disputed mandate (through the Electoral College).

6. Finally, it seems that not only is Dr. Kissinger working closely with this administration but he is also standing ready to accept an important foreign-policy assignment for President Carter - if called upon to do so.

7/22/77

CSM