PRESS CONFERENCE NO. 9

of the

PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

11:05 A.M. EDT

February 26, 1975

Wednesday

In the Convention Hall
At the Diplomat Hotel
Hollywood, Florida

THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. Will you please sit down.

First, let me express my appreciation to the people of Florida for their hospitality." It has been a pleasure being here, and I look forward to the rest of the day.

Before answering questions, I have a short prepared statement that I would like to make at the outset. It reads as follows:

"There have been reports in recent weeks of attempts in the international banking community to discriminate against certain institutions or individuals on religious or ethnic grounds.

"There should be no doubt about the position of this Administration and the United States. Such discrimination is totally contrary to the American tradition and repugnant to American principles. It has no place in the free practice of commerce as it has flourished in this country.

"Foreign businessmen and investors are most welcome in the United States when they are willing to conform to the principles of our society. However, any allegations of discrimination will be fully investigated and appropriate action taken under the laws of the United States."

Mr. McDermott.

QUESTION: Mr. President, what was behind Dr. Kissinger's recent observation that some day we might have to go in and destroy the oil wells of the Middle East? Do you envision such a possibility ever happening?

MORE

THE PRESIDENT: I do not recollect the precise statement that is attributed to the Secretary. I suspect you are referring to theoft quoted statement about strangulation.

I have answered that question, as has the Secretary, on a number of occasions. To be repetitive at this point I think might only increase speculation. The facts are that there was an answer to a very hypothetical question of the most extreme circumstances, and both the Secretary and I have indicated our views on the subject.

QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. President.

QUESTION: Mr. President, is what you call our moral commitment to arm South Vietnam and Cambodia open-ended, and what are you doing specifically to bring the warring parties to the peace table?

THE PRESIDENT: The commitment that we have to the South Vietnamese and the commitment that we have to some extent in Cambodia is one that we, as the United States, agreed at the Paris Peace accords, that we would withdraw our forces and that hopefully peace would be established in Indochina.

Part of our commitment was that we would, in the process or as the result of the withdrawal of our own military personnel, we would continue to supply arms on a replacement basis, and that commitment was predicated on the willingness of the South Vietnamese to fight aggression from North Vietnam.

The South Vietnamese are fighting, are trying to protect their country, and are seeking to defend their country from invasion. It seems to me that as we look back at our participation in the Paris accords, and the promises that were made, as long as they were willing to fight against aggression and invasion, that we had an obligation to help them with military equipment on a replacement basis.

The situation there is one that I am willing to negotiate with the Congress. I indicated that if the Congress would join with me, we would make a firm and final decision on a three-year basis to permit South Vietnam to get over the current crisis that they face.

I think that would be a reasonable solution. I am told that the South Vietnamese in a three-year period, with our military and economic aid, would be able to handle the situation.

MORE

[T]

THE PRESIDENT: Cambodia: the problem there is extremely critical. Unless there be additional U. S. military aid, as I have recommended, the Cambodians will run out of ammunition in a relatively short period of time. I think that that would be most unfortunate because if they are able -- between now and the end of the dry season -- to maintain their national integrity -- the present government -- there is a possibility of negotiations that might end the war in Cambodia.

QUESTION: Mr. President with reference to your energy-economic program, Congress is going off in one direction. You have suggested another direction. You have also suggested that you are willing to compromise. I wonder if you might specify some of those areas of compromise?

THE PRESIDENT: There was a single plan proposed by the majority party in the Congress. It is a slight exaggeration, but there are many, many plans that have been discussed by the majority party. I can think of three in particular, the plan that is proposed by Senator Pastore, the plan that is proposed by Congressman Jim Wright of Texas and the plan that has been proposed by Chairman Al Ullman of the House Committee on Ways and Means.

And I understand there are many more. What we need is a plan that the Democrats can agree on, if they can, and then we can sit down and, hopefully, negotiate. I am willing to cooperate, but we have to have something to cooperate with, and so far, they have not come up with anything where they are in agreement, so until they do, we are going to pursue our plan, which I think is fair and equitable and a solution to the energy problem.

QUESTION: Are you saying, a single package plan from the Democrats before you will negotiate?

THE PRESIDENT: I think that is a fair statement, and I think it is a fair proposition. We have to sit around a table with a group or somebody, where they say, "Here is your plan," and here is my plan," and then we can try to integrate them. But until they have some consensus on their side, we are in the position where there is no real viable plan for us to take a look at.

Now, I intend to keep the pressure on. The pressure that I have used in legal and legitimate ways has precipitated more response in the Congress than any time in the last three years. We still have some time, and when I get back to Washington, if they have got a plan where they agree, then we can sit down and negotiate.

MORE

QUESTION: Mr. President, some of the news executives who had breakfast with you this morning report that you talked about Congress not acting on an anti-recession tax cut until June. Are you really that pessimistic about the outlook?

THE PRESIDENT: I certainly hope that Congress acts before then, but I submitted my economic plan for the stimulation of our economy, so we could reduce unemployment, so we could increase employment, in January -- I think it was January 15th of this year.

And our proposal was very simple and hopefully it would result in Congress acting very quickly. It is almost five weeks now, and the House of Representatives has not yet acted. I hope they act this week. Hearings probably will start in the Senate Committee on Finance next week, and then it has to go to the Senate. And then, if there are differences between the Senate plan and the House plan, it will have to go to conference. That could conceivably take until June.

I think that is very ill-advised and extremely serious. We had hoped that Congress would act by the middle of March at the latest, and they could have, if they had taken the simple specific tax reductions that I recommended.

Unfortunately, the parliamentary process has been slowed down in the Congress, and the country has been the loser. We need a stimulant now, and I hope the Congress will realize the urgency of the need for action. And I trust that now that they have been reminded of their slowness, that they will expedite the process.

QUESTION: Good morning, Mr. President. I am Dick Powers from the Fort Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel.

Last week, here, in South Florida, George Meany proposed the nationalization as an ultimate solution of the oil industry. Heretofore, there have been proposals from Congress for the nationalization of health insurance and for utilities and for the railroads. Do you see these proposals a reluctance on the part of the American people to tough out our economic woes and accelerate a drift into socialism, sir?

THE PRESIDENT: I do not think the nationalization of any industry in the United States is in our best interest, nor do I think a government monopoly in any industry is a good answer, without being critical of individual employees of the Postal Service. I think the Postal Service has not been as good an answer as we would like to the delivery of mail. We are trying to improve it, but it does seem to me that there is a better answer to the energy problem that the nationalization of the oil industry.

We do have to stimulate production. We do have to, through the windfall profits tax that I have proposed, keep profits at a reasonable level. We do have to make sure that we get away from foreign oil imports, but I honestly do not believe nationalization is the best answer.

HORE

QUESTION: Mr. President, on oil -- with your favoring of a minimum price level and oil deregulation -- won't you be guaranteeing to the oil companies a revenue bonanza that is based solely on the arbitrarily high price levels that have been set in the past year or so by the OPEC countries?

THE PRESIDENT: My energy program does not guarantee any specific price except that we have been negotiating with other consuming nations for what is a minimum price or a floor price.

A minimum price at a reasonable level is a way in which we can continue to stimulate domestic production of additional oil, additional natural gas, and other energy sources such as solar, geothermal, etcetera.

We are not guaranteeing oil companies any particular price, and if there is a windfall profit, then the Congress has an obligation to enact my windfall profits tax so that there will not be inequitable benefits from the energy crisis by the oil companies.

QUESTION: Bill Groves from Jacksonville.

Mr. President, is it true that either rationing or allocation would be less inflationary than the package you have proposed, and would be less burdensome on those least able to pay?

THE PRESIDENT: I do not think that is the fundamental issue that is involved. Rationing, gasoline rationing, for example, would be very inequitable, and it would not provide any stimulant for new sources of energy, either oil, natural gas or any of the others.

Allocation--import allocations I assume you are referring to--according to the experts that have looked at it, that I have listened to, tell me that would probably be more injurious to our economy than any other procedure that was used. You would have government officials making arbitrary decisions as to how much oil could owe to one industry or to another and that would inevitably be discriminatory.

I happen to think that the price mechanism procedure which I have proposed is a better plan because it gives flexibility to users to make those basic decisions.

The plan that I recommended has, according to the experts that we have talked with and I have listened to, a one-shot increase in cost. On the other hand, through the tax rebate program that I have recommended, the added energy cost to individuals, to business, to government, would be turned to those people who have had an added cost.

So, it would be fruitful as far as the users are concerned, and it would stimulate production, which is what we really want.

MORE

Page 6

QUESTION: Mr. President, no that unemployment
has reached a very high point and it seems likely to
go even higher, is there anything that you can do as
President to alleviate the situation without going
to Congress, and if there is, what is it and do you
intend to do it and if so, when?

THE PRESIDENT: Number one, we submitted an
economic plan to the Congress, a tax reduction proposal
that would have returned to taxpayers or resulted in
a reduction in taxes of some $16.5 billion. That
proposal is on the agenda of the Congress.

I wish they would act more quickly, and some
of our problems might be alleviated. Other than that,
I think we have to seek to restore public confidence
in the system and in the prospects for economic
revival.

There is some evidence that the public now
believes, as most experts agree, that we are
bottoming out, so to speak, and the prospects for an
increase in employment and a decrease in unemployment
will come sometime in the third or fourth quarter of
1975.

QUESTION: What you are saying then is there
is really nothing more that you as President can do.

THE PRESIDENT: I do not believe so. On the
other hand, if there is anything, instead of increasing
expenditures, as some have suggested, I would favor a
larger tax decrease, but at the present moment I do
not think we have reached that point.

I simply would hope that the Congress would act
so we could find out whether that is enough stimulant,
but other than that, I know of no other proposal.

QUESTION: Mr. President, your Hispanic adviser,
Fernando DeBaca, told the Miami News yesterday that you
have never formally re-evaluated U.S. foreign policy toward
Cuba since you became the President. Are you in the process
of re-evaluating the government's position, and do you
foresee any lifting of economic and diplomatic sanctions
toward Cuba in the immediate future?

THE PRESIDENT: Very frequently in my daily
meetings with Secretary of State Kissinger we discuss
Latin American policy, including our policy toward
Cuba. The policy today is the same as it has been,
which is that if Cuba will re-evaluate and give us some
indication of a change of its policy toward the United
States, then we certainly would take another look, but
thus far there is no sign of Mr. Castro's change of
heart, and so we think it is in our best interest to
continue the policies that are in effect at the present
time.

MORE

QUESTION: Mr. President, a number of responsible Americans, including Senator Mansfield, have expressed concern that we are selling more arms than ever to more nations. We now sell to Pakistan as well as India, to Arab countries as well as Israel.

What is your credo in regard to arms sales? Is it influenced by the state of the economy, and what do you say to those who say that such sales are immoral?

THE PRESIDENT: First, let me be very specific. The sales of U.S. military equipment to any country is not predicated on trying to help the U.S. economy. We do have a policy of selling arms to other nations if that country feels it has an internal security problem; and number two, if it is necessary for one or any of the countries to maintain their national integrity or security.

We believe that in many areas of the world a proper military balance is essential for internal as well as external security of various countries. And where other nations, such as the Soviet Union, does sell or give arms to one country or another, if another country feels that its own security it needs additional military equipment and has the cash, then we feel that it is proper to make a sale from the United States to that country.

QUESTION: Mr. President, South Florida has a disproportionate number of elderly persons, thousands of poor and elderly who are finding it hard to even have one hot meal a day. How can we justify Federal programs that would reduce or take away what little assistance they are getting now, particularly when we continue to pump millions of dollars in foreign aid overseas?

The question they are asking is, when does charity begin at home?

THE PRESIDENT: Let's take the food for the elderly program. In this current fiscal year the Federal Government is spending $207.5 million for that program under the older citizens legislation, which is six times what it was four years ago.

We will continue to monitor the situation, and if that is inadequate, we will do our utmost to find additional funding.

But I think it has to be put in perspective that $202 million plus is not an inconsequential amount just for that one program, plus the other programs that are aimed at helping our older citizens.

I feel very strongly that they should be given adequate aid and assistance, plus Social Security, and I should say that I have not recommended a reduction in Social Security, but have recommended a 5 percent increase in Social Security benefits, along with other programs.

MORE

QUESTION: Mr. President, as you know, Florida has some of the highest electrical power bills in the Nation. Won't the people who pay those bills be hurt substantially by your foreign oil import program, since most, if not all, of the oil that Florida power companies burn comes from Venezuela?

THE PRESIDENT: The energy program that I have recommended would not result in Florida paying a disproportionate share of any cost increase. As a matter of fact, under the administrative action that I have taken, we have, under the first dollar, exempted heating oil as far as Florida is concerned, as far as New England is concerned, as far as Hawaii, the areas that are, as you indicate, in the same circumstances as Florida.

And under the permanent program that I have recommended, the added energy cost to a family, or to business, or to government, would be rebated to the individual, to the business and to the governments, so there would be a neutral impact. Therefore, it seems to me that my proposal is extremely equitable and would not result in any disproportionate burden being placed on Florida or any State in a comparable situation.

QUESTION: Mr. President, your opening statement seemed to imply that the United States was planning some sort of action against the Arab nations that have embargoed Jewish-owned banks. Could you be more specific? What sort of things might we do in this case, if the embargo continues?

THE PRESIDENT: All we have so far are some allegations. I have asked the Departments of Justice, Commerce and State to investigate any allegations. The actual action that would be taken will be forthcoming from recommendations by those departments. They have not been placed on my desk at the present time.

QUESTION: Mr. President, you have referred to the question of aid to Cambodia as a moral one relating to the credibility of the United States. But is the issue of credibility really at stake when so many of those with whom we would want to maintain it criticized our involvement in that area to begin with and long urged us to get out before we did?

THE PRESIDENT: Are you referring to other nations?

QUESTION: Other nations, yes.

THE PRESIDENT: I do not think we can conduct American foreign policy on the basis of what other nations think is in our best interest. The United States has to predicate its foreign policy on what it thinks is in America's best interest.

Now, we respect the right of other nations to be critical of what we do, but it is my responsibility and, I think, the responsibility of people in authority in the United States to make decisions that are based on what we think is good for America, and that is the way it will be decided as long as I am President.

MORE

QUESTION: Mr. President, there has been a new crop of reports in recent days about the possibility of Secretary Kissinger leaving office this year to be succeeded by Ambassador Elliot Richardson. Could you comment on these reports, and specifically, do you expect Dr. Kissinger to remain in office at least until November of next year?

THE PRESIDENT: I happen to feel very strongly that Secretary Henry Kissinger is an outstanding Secretary of State, and he and I have never discussed any change in his responsibilities. I know of no plans of any kind whatsoever on my part, or his part, to change the responsibilities -- the very heavy and important responsibilities that he has.

On the other hand, I recently submitted the name of Elliot Richardson to be Ambassador to Great Britain. I picked him because I think he will do a first class job there, and he has been recently confirmed. And I am confident, when he goes to London, he will carry out those responsibilities in that job in a very exemplary way.

MORE

QUESTION: Mr. President, it is estimated by immigration officials here in South Florida that there are up to 90,000 illegal aliens unfully employed in Southeast Florida alone. It is also estimated our unemployment figure runs close to that amount. What is your office doing to address itself to this particular problem?

THE PRESIDENT: We have been trying to strengthen the arm of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the Department of Justice, in order to handle in an appropriate way the illegal alien problem.

Florida has a serious problem. California has an equally serious problem. We are trying to work with the Mexican government, for example, primarily out in the Western states. We are fully cognizant of the adverse impact that illegal aliens have on employment opportunities of American citizens, but we are trying to stop the flow in. We are seeking to send back illegal aliens as quickly as possible under the laws of the United States.

QUESTION: Mr. President, Senator Pastore is proposing that there be a special election anytime an appointed Vice President succeeded to the Presidency; that is, if there is more than one year of the term remaining.

Since you are the only such person, what is your feeling about it? Would you recommend or endorse a change in the Twenty-fifth Amendment?

THE PRESIDENT: I am not sure that I ought to pass judgment on the validity of the Twenty-fifth Amendment. I guess I could say it worked pretty well this time. (Laughter)

But I think it is appropriate that the Congress take another look at the Twenty-fifth Amendment. It was passed, as I think most of us know, not to meet the unique circumstances that developed in 1973 and 1974.

Perhaps this experience does require the Congress to take a look, to see whether there is a better way or a different way where a Vice President might be selected.

QUESTION: Do you feel any handicap for not having one, a Presidential election, and still holding the office?

THE PRESIDENT: The answer is no.

MORE

QUESTION: Mr. President, Jim Reynolds, WIOD News, Chicago.

You stated Congress has been slow to act on two of the Nation's major issues -- energy and the tax cut. As a former Congressman, can you give us any insight into why you feel the Congress is having this difficulty?

THE PRESIDENT: In the failure of the Congress to act quickly enough in reducing taxes, as I recommended, I am really perplexed because we recommended a very simple method of returning $16.5 billion to the American people and to American business.

That should have been quickly considered, acted on very rapidly, and I do not understand why there has been the kind of delay that has taken place.

In the case of the energy problem, that is more understandable. Even though I don't like it, it is a very comprehensive program that involves 170 pages in one bill that I recommended and that will require hearings and action.

But what disappoints me -- and this I do not understand -- is why there have not been hearings before the proper committees in the House and the Senate on either my plan or the others that the Democratic Members in the Congress have, on their plans.

But that is why I have the pressure on with the import levy. I think they are now beginning to focus on the need and the necessity. Up until recently, they just hoped the problem would go away. Now they are beginning to realize it is serious, and hopefully there will be some affirmative action.

QUESTION: Mr. President, in answering an earlier question about Cambodia, you used the phrase "the commitment that we have to some extent to Cambodia," to distinguish it from Vietnam. Just what is our commitment to Cambodia when at the time the American troops went in there in 1970, people were told there was not going to be any long-term commitment? Could you explain that, sir?

THE PRESIDENT: Cambodia is in a somewhat different situation from Vietnam. Vietnam is involved in the Paris accords. Cambodia was not in an official way. So, our obligation, which I think is important, is that they want to maintain their national integrity, and their security of their country against outside forces.

MORE

JOINT COMMUNIQUE

On the First Session of the U.S. - Saudi Arabian

Joint Commission on Economic Cooperation

The U.S. - Saudi Arabian Joint Commission on Economic Cooperation, established in accordance with the Joint Statement issued by Secretary of State Kissinger and Prince Fahd on June 8, 1974, concluded its first session. The Joint Commission meetings, held in Washington February 26-27, 1975, were chaired by Secretary of the Treasury William E. Simon, Chairman of the U.S. side of the Commission. The Saudi Arabian Delegation was led by Minister Muhammad Ibn Ali Aba al-Khail, Minister of State for Financial Affairs and National Economy.

High level officials from the U.S. Departments of Treasury, State, Agriculture, Commerce, Health, Education and Welfare, Interior, and Labor, and from the National Science Foundation also participated in the talks. Members of the visiting Saudi Arabian Delegation participating in the discussion included officials from the Ministries of Foreign Affairs, Commerce and Industry, Labor and Social Affairs, Agriculture and Water, and the Central Planning Organization, as well as high-level Saudi representatives from the Supreme Council of Higher Education, the Faculty of Sciences, and the Institute of Public Administration.

The members of the Commission exchanged views on the development of U.S.-Saudi Arabian economic cooperation since the visit of Secretary Simon last July to Saudi Arabia for preliminary discussions on economic cooperation. At that time, the Commission initiated the activities of its four working groups on Manpower and Education, Science and Technology, Agriculture, and Industrialization. Each of the joint working groups has met several times to define areas of potential economic cooperation and a number of U.S. technical experts and advisors have visited Saudi Arabia and submitted reports to the Saudi Arabian side of the Commission. The Joint Commission discussed further means of facilitating such continued cooperation through the Joint Commission framework.

In this regard the Commission was pleased to note the signing on February 13, 1975, of a Technical Cooperation Agreement (TCA) which establishes procedures for the furnishing of mutually-agreed technical and advisory services from the United States to Saudi Arabia on a reimbursable basis. The TCA should contribute significantly to the efficient channeling of American technical know-how to the Saudi Arabian national economy.

The Commission expressed its intention to expand the Joint Commission Office in Riyadh. This office serves as the principal point of coordination in Saudi Arabia for the development and

implementation of mutually-agreed projects under the U.S. - Saudi
Arabian Technical Cooperation Agreement. The U.S. component
of this office, to be known as the United States Representation to the
Joint Economic Cooperation Commission Office, plans to begin
operating by the middle of May 1975. The Saudi delegation
announced that it would also be adding to the staff of its component of
the Riyadh Joint Commission Office in the near future. Arrangements
for accommodating these two staffs are to be discussed in Riyadh
in the coming weeks.

The Commission noted with satisfaction the signing by the
Co-Chairmen of an OPIC Investment Guaranty Agreement between
the two governments. The Agreement should increase and broaden
the interest of U.S. private enterprise in participating in Saudi
Arabian economic development.

INDUSTRIALIZATION AND TRADE

The Saudi delegation reaffirmed its interest in acquiring
U.S. technology through U.S. business participation for the
development of major industrial projects in both the hydrocarbon
and non-hydrocarbon areas.

The Commission agreed on the desirability of a broadly-based
business council designed to increase business cooperation
between the two countries and enhance the contribution of U.S.

business to Saudi Arabia's industrial development. In view of
the important role of government in Saudi Arabia's development,
concerned Saudi Arabian Government elements would join with
private sector interests in Saudi Arabia and the United States as
members of the Council. The Council would identify for study,
projects which appear feasible for joint ventures, note and make
recommendations on financial, fiscal, or legal considerations
bearing on cooperative efforts, arrange business symposia and
visits in both countries, and be a center for disseminating
information on business opportunities in both countries.

The Saudi Arabian Government will consider the possibility
of organizing a group of Saudi businessmen to visit the United
States within the next two months to meet with United States business
firms and groups. The general purpose would be to increase the
communications between the two private sectors. More specifically,
the group would discuss various industrial proposals and projects.

The Commission noted with interest that trade relations
between the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the United States have
been developing at an accelerated rate. U.S. exports to Saudi
Arabia nearly doubled in 1971, increased by 40% in 1973, and
nearly doubled again in 1974, to $835 million. Expectations are that

U.S. export will continue to grow progressively. It is anticipated
that U.S. exporters will play a significant role in supplying
equipment, machinery, technology and services.

The Governments of the United States and Saudi Arabia agreed
that participation in productive ventures in each other's economies
should be mutually beneficial. They recognize that activities of
this type in both countries would require close consultation to
assure consistency with their national policies and objectives.
Consequently, they agreed that each government would consult
with the other regarding significant undertakings of this type.

The Commission agreed on the desirability of United States
Government technical assistance in developing a statistical base
for development in Saudi Arabia. The American side stated its
readiness to send out teams of experts in a number of principal
statistical disciplines to assist the Saudi Arabian Government in
developing an effective statistical capability.

The Commission heard reports and exchanged views on the
current status of a number of technical cooperation projects in
the fields of vocational training, higher education, agriculture,
water utilization and land use, science and technology and
statistics. A summary of these follows:

- 6 -

[LC]

## VOCATIONAL TRAINING

The Commission noted the series of recommendations by the American vocational training team which visited Saudi Arabia last fall. These recommendations, in support of the implementation of Saudi Arabia's five-year plan vocational training goals, include United States Government advisory services in various fields of manpower development.

### HIGHER EDUCATION

It was agreed at the Commission meeting to send an American team to evaluate the academic and administrative structures of the Saudi Arabian University system, as well as the relationship of universities to high-level professional and technical education.

A second action area to be explored will involve U.S. -Saudi Arabian cooperation in the following areas: broadened student and faculty exchanges between the two countries, joint research projects, joint degree programs, the establishment of junior colleges in Saudi Arabia, and the training of academic, administrative, and technical personnel in Saudi universities.

### AGRICULTURE, WATER RESOURCES AND LAND USE

The Commission discussed United States Government technical services for joint agricultural, water and land projects. Priority

- 7 -

[LC]

was given to feasibility studies of major agricultural areas in Saudi Arabia, a study of the Central Research Laboratory and Agriculture Training Center of the Ministry of Agriculture and Water, and the establishment of a desalination center and laboratory.

It was agreed that a four-man U.S. Government team would go to Saudi Arabia for a two-month period to discuss and reach agreement with Saudi Arabian counterparts on a detailed program for implementing a feasibility study for large agricultural areas, such as Wadi Dawasir.

The Commission also approved the immediate departure to Saudi Arabia of a research management team to plan a research program and determine organizational and management requirements for the Central Research Laboratory and Agricultural Training Center.

A U.S. Government proposal for the establishment of the desalination center will be sent to the Saudi Arabian Government in response to their request.

Projects in the areas of land management, water utilization and a national data bank would be implemented under the Technical Cooperation Agreement. Further discussions will be held immediately to decide on the implementation of these proposals.

SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

It was agreed that a Saudi Arabian National Center for
Science and Technology would be established to coordinate the
growth of science and technology in Saudi Arabia and to support and
fund mutually-agreed upon program areas of interest to Saudi
Arabia. It was further agreed that an initial United States Govern-
ment team would be sent to Saudi Arabia as soon as possible to
advise on the objectives and functions of the Saudi National
Center. Additional U.S. expert teams to follow will work with
Saudi Arabian experts to define the precise programs for the other
agreed project areas.

OTHER AREAS

The Saudi delegation requested technical assistance over a
limited period of time to its Government's Department of Public
Works.

The U.S. agreed to review the requirements of the Saudi
Arabian Public Works Department to determine the nature and
extent of technical services desired.

OVERALL ASSESSMENT

The Commission expressed satisfaction with the progress
to date and considered the discussions at its first meeting a

major step forward in the constructive development of mutually advantageous economic relations. With a view to keeping close track of the Commission's efforts, the U.S. side decided to establish an Action Group. The U.S. coordinator will be Gerald L. Parsky, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, the Department which is the U.S. coordinating agency for the work of the Commission. The Saudi side will consider a similar arrangement.

The action group and its Saudi counterpart will be charged with monitoring progress being made on a regular basis so as to insure that program goals are being met and to review and implement new proposals that may be agreed upon. The Action Group on the U.S. side will consist of representatives from the Departments of Treasury and State, and the following U.S. action agencies: Agriculture, Commerce, Health, Education and Welfare, Interior, Labor and the National Science Foundation and other U.S. Government agencies as may become appropriate.

Both sides agreed to consider holding the next Joint Commission meeting in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, in October 1975.

- 29 - #157-3/3

Q Ron, the first program, the Democratic alternative plan that came out Friday; you said when you were sketching your objections to it --

MR. NESSEN: Not mine.

Q -- Zarb's and Morton's, et cetera, that they would run. it through the computer, and concluded it will not reach the President's goal.

MR. NESSEN: Right.

Q Now, just to be sure I understand--the Ullman plan--you have not decided yet that that is not going to reach the President's goal, but you flatly stated the first one is not going to?

MR. NESSEN: Correct. This is what the President was told by the technicians. It is something that he independently cannot determine himself. He was told this by the technicians.

Q What did he say, Ron, after he read the thing and they told them this? You talked to him this morning. Did he say, "We cannot buy that Democrat's plan"?

MR. NESSEN: He did not make a specific comment on it, Gaylord, and I did not hear the other end of the phone conversation on Saturday.

Q Ron, I just want to reserve a question on another subject before somebody says that you --

MR. NESSEN: Is that it now? Is everybody fairly straight on this?

Les?

Q The question has to do with Secretary Schlesinger, who was asked, after he came out of a Congressional hearing, about the screening out of members of the Jewish faith regarding an armed forces assignment to Saudi Arabia.

He said, "No, I wasn't aware of that. That is contrary to the instructions within the Department of Defense, which eminated from a case involving a black colonel a year ago. However, the U.S. Government must not discriminate against the employees" -- and this is the point -- "if another country decides to reject an American citizen, it must reject it because of the sovereign interference of that other government rather than the action taken by the U.S. government in regard to screening persons," and that leaves us with the ultimate question.

MORE #157

- 30 -

#157-3/3

Will the Commander in Chief go on allowing Saudi Arabia to impose religious segregation on units of our armed forces, or will he order them out of Saudi Arabia if this practice continues?

MR. NESSEN: I think there is additional Q and A.

Do you have the rest of the quote?

Q No, this is the quote that was dictated to me by the Department of Defense.

MR. NESSEN: If you wait until I get the rest of it, I think it explains how Secretary Schlesinger intends to deal with the matter.

Q He says there won't be any more screening of Jewish persons, but you still have to get a baptismal certificate if you are going to go to Saudi Arabia.

Now, what is the Commander in Chief going to do about that, tell all the Jews to convert or what? This is a very important question, Ron. I think you can recognize it. It is a question as to whether the Commander in Chief of the armed forces is going to allow a foreign country to impose religious segregation on our troops.

MR. NESSEN: Let me see how Schlesinger answered that very specific point in the remainder of his --

Q What does the President say? Has he discussed it over the weekend at all? He said in Florida that this was contrary to American law and American procedure and so forth. What is the President going to do?

MR. NESSEN: Wait a second. Again, I think we need to be more precise with the words there. He asked these four departments to look into the matter to see if there were any American laws being violated or whether any laws were needed, for that matter.

The remainder of the Schlesinger quote, if I can pull it out of my memory, is he was going to find out whether the Pentagon was living up to the instructions that they are supposed to follow in terms of assigning people to overseas posts.

Q Sure, Ron, but the problem is the Pentagon cannot tell the King of Saudi Arabia, "Stop being anti-Jewish," can they?

MR. NESSEN: I would not think so.

MORE

#157

- 31 - #157-3/3

Q Then what is the President going to do if the Saudi Arabians insist that you have to have a baptismal certificate to get in -- military and civilian? Then what is the President going to do? Is he going to tolerate this or order our armed forces out?

MR. NESSEN: I think, first of all, he needs to determine what the facts are; and that is what Secretary Schlesinger said the other day that he was going to do, was to determine the facts of this.

Q Ron, while you are waiting for that, my question dealt with the President's news conference in Hollywood, Florida, where he was asked about re-evaluation of U.S. policy toward Cuba.

MR. NESSEN: Wait. I have the Schlesinger thing here before my very eyes.

Q I still want to get my question in.

MR. NESSEN: You will.

The rest of that was:

"Question: Are there other agencies within the Department of Defense that are also screening?"

"Answer: I would think that this case is an exception."

"Question: Are you planning any action?"

"Answer: We will investigate that thoroughly."

"Question: Will there be any disciplinary action?"

"Answer: If disciplinary action is called for, it will be put into effect."

I think the key question there is, "Are you planning any action?" "Answer: We will investigate that thoroughly."

Q Ron, he can investigate until the cows come home, but the fact of the matter is the Department of Defense has confirmed the fact that Saudi Arabia requires evidence that you are not a Jew to get in. We have got troops there.

The basic question, Ron, is the Commander in Chief going to allow the Saudi Arabians to impose religious segregation on the armed forces of the United States. Yes or no, Ron? Do you know? Or, do we wonder? Do we just ask the questions?

MORE #157

- 18 -

#154-2/28

MR. NESSEN: I don't know what they are saying, but I do know the President has been told there are the votes to sustain the veto.

Q Will the veto go Monday or Tuesday? Do you know that?

MR. NESSEN: It has not been decided yet, Carroll.

Q Ron, on the boycott issue, the President said, "Foreign businessmen and investors are welcome in the United States when they are willing to conform to the principles of our society."

I wonder in that respect if the President does not feel that the Soviets may have been on firm ground when they blocked very strenuously attempts of U.S. lawmakers to tack the immigration restrictions on the trade bill?

MR. NESSEN: Whatever action the President may take on the matter of discrimination would certainly be aimed at making sure that American laws are carried out or that if new laws are needed, they are proposed. It would not be a question of involving yourself in the foreign policy of another country. It would be making sure American laws are carried out.

Q In other words, possibly we would have one set of principles at home and another set of principles abroad?

MR. NESSEN: I don't see how you leap to that, Gene. It is obvious the United States cannot dictate another country's internal policies nor can any other country dictate our internal policies. But the President will certainly be sure our internal policies do not allow for any discrimination.

Q Ron, I understand the Democrats sent down some copies of their energy plan. Did the President receive one personally, and has he read it?

MR. NESSEN: I don't know what you refer to as the energy plan.

Q Why don't you guess what I am referring to?

(Laughter.)

MR. NESSEN: I know what you are referring to. There is a five-page announcement, some copies of which have reached the White House. The President has seen it and his reaction was, "Where is the rest of it?" But he has seen it.

MORE

#154

PRESS
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Oakley et al
Public Statements

March 4, 1975

No. 115

#50

JOINT PRESS CONFERENCE BY
THE HONORABLE HENRY A. KISSINGER
SECRETARY OF STATE
AND HIS EXCELLENCY HUSHANG ANSARY
MINISTER OF ECONOMIC AFFAIRS AND FINANCE OF IRAN
ON THE CONCLUSION OF THE MEETINGS OF THE U.S.-IRAN JOINT COMMISSION
AND THE SIGNING OF THE JOINT COMMUNIQUE
AND TECHNICAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT
WASHINGTON, D.C.

MARCH 4, 1975

SECRETARY KISSINGER: Mr. Minister, on behalf of
the President and the United States Government I would like
to express our very great gratification at the agreed
minutes and the Technical Cooperation Agreement that we
have just signed.

The Economic Cooperation Agreement between Iran
and the United States that is foreseen is the largest
agreement of this kind that has been signed between any
two countries. It represents an attempt to underline the

For further information contact:

PR #115

2

interdependence to which both of our countries have been committed, in which the resources of the producers are combined with the technological experience of some of the consuming countries, to enhance the development and the progress of both sides.

It reflects also the very deep political bonds that exist between Iran and the United States.

The Economic Cooperation Agreement foresees projects on the order of $12 billion which will be completed, or the negotiations for which is in the process of being completed, or will be completed in the very near future.

Out of this economic cooperation we expect that there will develop a trade between the two countries, excluding oil, over the next five years in the amount of $15 billion. These projects will represent a major step forward in the very vast scheme of development that Iran has undertaken, and the United States is happy that it can play its part in this enterprise. It also reflects the conviction of both sides that an expanding world economy is in the interests of progress and peace.

I would like to express our appreciation to my colleague, the Co-Chairman of the Commission, for the manner in which the negotiations have been conducted. It was in an

PR #115

3

atmosphere of friendship and understanding and cooperation
which we are certain will be extended in the years to come.

I also would like to express on behalf of the
President how much he's looking forward to the visit of
His Imperial Majesty, the Shah, in May.

Thank you.

MINISTER ANSARY: Thank you, Mr. Secretary.

May I join you in expressing the gratification
and appreciation of the Iranian team in the talks that we
have had in the course of the past two days in the second
session of our Joint Ministerial Commission for Economic
Cooperation. We are extremely pleased on our side that the
outcome of these negotiations is entirely satisfactory to
both sides. We have managed to reach agreement on the use
of the comparative advantages of the two countries for the
benefit not only of our respective nations but also of the
world at large.

To your remarks, Mr. Secretary, I may add that
Iran is the first major oil producing country to go nuclear
in a major way; and one important aspect of the Agreement
that we have reached on the areas of cooperation between
the two countries is, of course, the readiness that has been
expressed in principle on the part of the Atomic Energy

[Lc]

PR #115

4

Organization of Iran to place orders for a large number
of nuclear power plants in the United States.

Of the other agreements that we reached, I think
the most important in terms not only of the development for
our relations but also of the problems facing the world
today is where this cooperation entails the production of
additional amounts of food and agricultural products not only
for the use of domestic needs of Iran but also for the
region at large.

This includes also the development of a center
for agricultural technology that would be used regionally
by all the countries concerned.

In addition to this, of course, it is highly
satisfactory to us that, the end result of economic
cooperation being increasing trade, the amount envisaged in
the Agreement for the exchange of commodities between the
two countries in the next five years is a rather impressive
figure of $15 billion that the Secretary has just mentioned.

May I take the opportunity also, Mr. Secretary,
to express my appreciation and sincere thanks for the
opportunity that I had to call on the President this
morning, and for his support and encouragement in the
efforts that are being made by the two sides for the

PR #115

5

development for our relations.

May I also thank you sincerely for all your
kindness, for your hospitality and for your warmth and
for the constructive attitude that at all times was
clearly visible on your personal side for the attention
that you rendered personally to the development of our
negotiations and for the tremendous contributions of every
distinguished member of your party.

Thank you very much.

SECRETARY KISSINGER: Thank you.

I would like also to point out that all the
nuclear plans are under the safeguards that are appropriate
to signatories of the Non-Froliferation Treaty, which, of
course, includes Iran. And I also would like to underline
the point that my colleague has already made about the
importance we attach to the agricultural development not
only for Iran but on a regional basis, and how much the
United States appreciates the efforts of Iran to use some
of its resources in the field of agricultural development
for increasing production, food production, in the entire
region.

And now we'll be glad to answer some questions.

PR #115

6

Q Mr. Secretary, Iran is undertaking to spend approximately 12 billion in the next five years. And you have jointly set a target of 15 billion in total non-oil trade. Does the $12 billion fit into that?

SECRETARY KISSINGER: Well, the $12 billion involves development projects that have already been agreed upon. They may extend over a period of slightly more than five years. Some of them may extend over a period of as long as eight years -- for example, the construction of nuclear power plants. So the figure of 12 billion fits inside the $15 billion figure but may go a little bit beyond it. But, nevertheless, we aim at a non-oil trade of $15 billion over the five years.

MINISTER ANSARY: For your information, the figure of $15 billion includes the amount of trade that would result from the agreements on the implementation of $12 billion worth of joint projects that would be implemented with the cooperation of the two countries. To that you will have to add the normal increase in the exchange of quantities between the two countries over and above the present volume, and, therefore, that is a figure that has been estimated to reach about $15 billion in the next five years.

PR #115

7

Q Mr. Minister, I understand that the United States has a bilateral agreement since, I think, '59, with Iran on nuclear research. And, also, last year, didn't you sign a 10-year agreement on plutonium from the United States? What is the difference between today and the last year's agreement?

MINISTER ANSARY: Mr. Marton, the agreement that we have reached with the Secretary under the document that was signed today concerns the construction of nuclear power plants in Iran up to 8,000 megawatts. And this, of course, is in conformity with the agreement that we have signed. We're a signatory to the Nonproliferation Agreement. The cooperation for the establishment for the construction of the nuclear power plants is a by-product of the agreements that we have had between the two countries on cooperation in this particular field.

Q Mr. Minister, what we're trying to establish, sir, is what the increase is from, what the base is that you have now. Could you explain that for us -- what you have in terms of present nuclear power plants from the

PR #115

8

United States and on order from France -- so that we can have a comparison of the magnitude as to what is involved in the current agreement.

MINISTER ANSARY: Excuse me. I think the question was -- ?

Q Can you tell us what you presently have from the United States in terms of nuclear power plants?

MINISTER ANSARY: We do not have any.

Q You don't have any. On order from France.

MINISTER ANSARY: The orders to France and to West Germany cover two nuclear power stations each.

SECRETARY KISSINGER: I whispered to the Minister to go immediately on the attack when Murrey Marder asks a question before he gets to the substance. (Laughter.)

Q Could you give us an indication, sir, then, what is involved in terms of -- you speak of a series of large nuclear power plants. Can you give us a number?

MINISTER ANSARY: Eight.

Q Eight?

MINISTER ANSARY: Approximately. Up to 8, yes.

Q Mr. Secretary, if you exclude oil from the

PR #115

9

total trade between the two countries, wouldn't that mean
that the $15 billion is almost wholly U. S. exports
to Iran?

SECRETARY KISSINGER: Well, there will be an
imbalance in our favor. (Laughter.)

Q What does that mean?

MINISTER ANSARY: May I please answer
that?

Iran, as you know, is developing very rapidly.
GNP would go up about 41 percent in real terms this
year in Iran. It's envisaged to average no less than
25.9 percent in real terms in the next three years. This
means that our needs for equipment, capital goods,
industrial raw material, spare parts and accessories
will continue to be great in the next decade; that
industrialization in our country is going at full speed;
and, therefore, we feel that although the principle of a
balanced trade is always very much on our mind, this
is a period during which the expansion of trade with our
leading trading partners will continue to be unbalanced.

Q Mr. Secretary, do you now regard the sale
of nuclear technology as a major instrument in American

PR #115

10

American foreign policy?

SECRETARY KISSINGER: No. We adjust this to the situation as it exists. Here we're dealing with a country that is a signatory of the Nonproliferation Treaty that is prepared to observe all of the safeguards that are appropriate to the countries that have signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty; and, therefore, we make our judgments on the basis of the necessity that the country perceives.

In the case of Iran, there is an attempt to develop alternative sources of energy. It is not a deliberate policy of the United States to spread nuclear technology around the world. This was a case where it was suitable for the necessities of one of our most important trading partners.

Q Mr. Minister, I'm a little confused. Have corporate contracts already been signed for the construction of these eight nuclear power plants?

MINISTER ANSARY: No. The agreement has been reached in principle, and that is indicative of Iran's readiness to place these orders subject to the other terms and conditions being negotiated later on.

PR #115

11

Q Mr. Minister, going back to the previous question, when oil is included in the two-way trade between the two countries, where is the balance in favor then?

MINISTER ANSARY: It is still highly in favor of the United States, for the time being.

Q Do you know the figures offhand, Mr. Minister, of what is the balance at the moment -- on how much the United States is paying for Iranian oil?

MINISTER ANSARY: I think your question had two different portions. Are you asking for the figures of trade between the two countries at this time?

Q Yes. And the oil figures separately -- yes, sir.

MINISTER ANSARY: The amount of oil, I think, is not very large at this time. It has been, perhaps, increasing. But as far as the non-oil trade is concerned, the latest figure is about $700 million in the past 12 months -- exports from the United States to Iran -- as against $50 million imports from Iran to the United States.

Q Mr. Minister, how much of the increased trade will be in armaments?

MINISTER ANSARY: Do you want to answer that

PR #115

12

question? (Refers to Secretary Kissinger.)

SECRETARY KISSINGER: None of the increased trade will be in armament. If there were an increase of armament sales, that would be in addition. These figures do not include any increase in armament sales. They do include the existing level of armament, but no increase.

Q How about --

MINISTER ANSARY: In other words, any increase would have to be added to this figure.

Q What do you compute the existing level of armament sales to be -- armaments trade to be -- of that $15 billion?

MINISTER ANSARY: It is presently running at approximately one and a half billion dollars a year.

Q So under this agreement, your non-oil exports -- U. S. exports to Iran -- would go from approximately $700 million a year at present to $3 billion a year.

MINISTER ANSARY: Approximately, yes.

Q Mr. Minister --

PR #115

14

Q Mr. Minister, forgive me, I am a little confused by this figure. You say a billion and a half a year in arms; that over a five-year period would alone be seven and a half billion. So, are we to understand that half of this $15 billion of projected trade would be in arms?

MINISTER ANSARY: Well, this is the present level. And the $15 billion is a rough estimate of what we think will develop in trade between the two countries. But I must say to you that our estimate of the rate of increase for non-armament, non-oil trade is really in fact much higher than the figure that we have mentioned. But we tried to take a middle course.

Q Would you tell us how you see the unfolding of trade? I think there is a little confusion here.

SECRETARY KISSINGER: We have to have a little consultation here to get this straightened out (laughter.) Because if the trade is $700 million now --

MINISTER ANSARY: Yes?

Q We have a total actually of $2.2 billion, if you add the 1-1/2 billion of American arms exports, less seven hundred million of non-oil exports to Iran, that gives us 2.2 billion in at least the current yearly trade from the United States. And you said the American imports

PR #115

15

from Iran are running at about 50 million dollars. You
didn't answer the other question about how much oil is
being purchased from Iran. Is it insignificant?

MINISTER ANSARY: I said it is not a very large
figure at this time. I don't recall the exact amount. But,
you see, at 2.2 billion, military and non-military
trade, from a figure of 2.2 billion to a figure of 3 billion
a year which has been envisaged as a target in the present
agreement, you have a jump of approximately 30 percent a
year.

Q How much, sir, of the 3 billion a year in
the new totals that you see will be in arms and non-arms?

MINISTER ANSARY: Well, we have already gone through
that. At the present level of one and a half billion,
seven and a half billion of the fifteen billion would be
arms if this continues. The other seven and a half
billion would be non-oil, non-military trade.

Now, it is running at 700 million a year now,
so in fact this is really a considerable jump.

Q Well, Mr. Minister, your figures on here
say your total cost of the projects that are listed runs
twelve billion dollars a year.

PR #115

16

MINISTER ANSARY: Where I must explain to you, for the Secretary and myself, is that the implementation of these projects which we have agreed upon, as the Secretary explained, would run over a period of time.

Now, this in fact means that we are envisaging a jump in the regular trade between the two countries of at least thirty percent a year.

Q. Eight hundred million dollars a year.

SECRETARY KISSINGER: I think we had better do some research on that armaments figure and give you -- and after we have achieved a consensus on what we are all talking about, we'll let you know within the hour. I think that would be a more reliable way of proceeding, because we may be operating from different base figures here.

Q. Mr. Secretary, in here you are talking about non-military -- Oh, I'm sorry, non-oil trade. I'm sorry, excuse me.

Q. Mr. Secretary, I'd like to ask a question about the communiqué aside from matters that have been under discussion for the past few minutes. In the reference to the Commission agreeing on the terms and conditions which will assure mutual benefits, subject to prevailing rules and regulations of each country--this is on long-term

PR #115

17

investment -- could you elaborate, sir, on that phrase, "the prevailing rules and regulations?"--also, you, too, Mr. Minister--for each country with special reference to the subject of selective buying and boycotts, and all that kind of thing.

SECRETARY KISSINGER: Well, of course, Iran has never been part of any boycotts that we are familiar with. As far as the United States is concerned, we are in the process of establishing investment policies for foreign investment. But the reference here therefore is to the domestic legislation of each country with respect to the investment in each country of the other. The question of boycott does not apply to Iran.

Q Mr. Secretary, isn't this the kind of bilateral deal that you criticized in the early days of the energy crisis?

SECRETARY KISSINGER: It specifically excludes oil. The bilateral deals we were commenting upon earlier were those in which each country attempted to make separate arrangements for oil.

Q Mr. Minister, would you elaborate somewhat on the establishment of Iran as a financial center for the region?

PR #115

18

What do you have in mind on this?

MINISTER ANSARY: Well, we are working on the
development of a capital market in Iran. And here we have
envisaged cooperation for the development of this market
with the assistance of the United States. As you know,
the absence of an important market between Zurich and
Singapore is felt considerably in our part of the world,
and we are planning on developing Teheran as an important
center for a capital market.

Q Mr. Secretary, although this agreement, as
with the Saudi arrangement, technically excludes the ques-
tion of oil, doesn't it appear to be an attempt to create
a special bilateral relationship which would then have
a carry-over effect in oil as well?

SECRETARY KISSINGER: Nobody has ever proposed
that all economic relationships between oil producers and
consumers must be done on a multilateral basis.

As the Minister has pointed out, Iran has a bilateral
relationship with France, has another bilateral agreement
with the Federal Republic of Germany. So this is -- the
fact that we have these economic commissions to establish
bilateral economic links has been a well-known part of
our policy, and is also carried out by all of our partners

PR #115

19

in the IEA. It can have no direct effect on the question
of OPEC policy. What it does do, it gives an opportunity
to the resources that result from oil to be used for the
productive development of Iran, and the United States
participates in this.

Q Can you tell us how this agreement compares
with Iran's trade with other industrialized nations? Is
there any comparison you could supply?

MINISTER ANSARY: Yes. It exceeds the combined
amount of agreements that we have with the industrial
nations of Western Europe put together -- if that helps.

Q By how much?

MINISTER ANSARY: I would have to calculate.
Do you want me to do that?

Q Well, if you have got an approximate figure
there.

MINISTER ANSARY: By about a billion.

SECRETARY KISSINGER: I thought he was going to
say about $25.00. [Laughter.]

Q Thank you, very much, sir.

[The briefing terminated at 4:07 p.m.]

FACT SHEET

(Per Post-Press Conference Briefing)

The following clarifies the questions raised at
the joint press conference of Secretary Kissinger and Minister
Ansary regarding projected trade between the U.S. and Iran
over the next five years:

Total projected Trade (excluding oil): $15 billion

Consisting of --

-- $5 billion in normal commodity trade estimated to expand at 20% per annum as Iran's economy expands.

-- $5 billion in estimated military equipment sales from the U.S. over the five year period.

-- $5 billion in actual exports generated by new capital projects mentioned in the joint communique.

These totals do not include "invisible" exports such as
tourist trade and miscellaneous service contracts.

The balance of the exports generated by the $12 billion
worth of the projects mentioned in the joint communique
would occur in 1980 and later.

NEA - GSHerman

3/4/75

THE WHITE HOUSE

WASHINGTON

March 4, 1975

MEMORANDUM FOR:

THE SECRETARY OF STATE

THE SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY

THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

THE SECRETARY OF COMMERCE

At my Florida press conference on Wednesday, February 26th, I made the following statement:

I request that you each do your utmost to ensure that any allegations of discrimination made to you are fully investigated and that appropriate action is taken in the event of violation of the laws of the United States.

Stuart R.zd

March 4, 1975

Office of the White House Press Secretary

NOTICE TO THE PRESS

The President met today at 12:00 Noon for 30 minutes with Hushang Ansary, Iranian Minister of Economic Affairs and Finance. Also attending the meeting were Ambassador Ardeshir Zahedi, of Iran and Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger, Under Secretary of State for Economic Affairs Charles Robinson, and Lt. General Brent Scowcroft.

The President and Minister Ansary reviewed U.S. -Iranian relations and other matters of mutual interest. They also discussed the work of the Joint U.S. -Iranian Commission on Cooperation and related energy and economic issues. The President reaffirmed the importance of our warm and close relations with Iran and expressed hope that constructive cooperation between our countries will contribute to a more stable international environment, particularly with respect to economic matters.

#          #          #

[LC]

Public Statements

PRESS

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

March 4, 1975

No. 115-A

U. S.-IRAN JOINT COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C.

March 4, 1975

Joint Communique

The U. S.-Iran Joint Commission completed its second session in Washington on March 3-4, 1975. The Iranian Delegation was headed by His Excellency Hushang Ansary, Minister of Economic Affairs and Finance, and the U. S. Delegation by the Secretary of State, Dr. Henry A. Kissinger, who are the co-chairmen of the Commission. Other high officials of both governments participated in the meeting.

The Joint Commission was established in November 1974 in order to broaden and intensify economic cooperation and consultation on economic policy matters.

During his visit Minister Ansary called on President Ford and conveyed to him the personal greetings of His Imperial Majesty, the Shahanshah Aryamehr of Iran. In his talks with President Ford and other American leaders, Minister Ansary discussed the current world situation and reviewed bilateral matters in the spirit of mutual respect and understanding long characteristic of the relations between Iran and the United States. He met with members of the Senate and House of Representatives, journalists, and leaders of the American business community.

The Commission reviewed the work done by its five joint committees, which had met during January and February, and approved a large number of technical cooperation projects and development programs which had been recommended by the committees. The Commission concluded that the scope for cooperation between the two countries for their mutual benefit was almost unlimited.

In the light of the strong desire on the part of the two sides to extend areas of mutual cooperation, the Commission set a target of $15 billion in total non-oil trade between the two countries during the next five years.

Major Iranian development projects selected for cooperation between the two countries include a series of large nuclear power plants, totaling 8,000 electrical megawatts, with associated water desalination plants; 20 prefabricated housing factories; 100,000 apartments and other housing units; five hospitals with a total of 3,000 beds; establishment of an integrated electronics industry; a major port for handling agricultural commodities and other port facilities; joint ventures to produce fertilizer, pesticides, farm machinery, and processed foods; super highways; and vocational training centers. The total cost of these projects is estimated to reach $12 billion.

The Commission also recognized the special importance of cooperation between the two countries in the field of petrochemicals, and took note of major projects under study for joint ventures between Iran and major companies in the United States to produce petrochemical intermediates and finished products for general use in Iran and for export.

-2-

PR#115-A

The Commission agreed that a joint business council could play a very useful role in broadening contact between the business sectors in both countries and in facilitating exchange of information on business opportunities and agreed that such a council should be established forthwith.

The Commission agreed that long-term investment from each country in the economy of the other should be on terms and conditions assuring mutual benefit, subject to prevailing rules and regulations in each country. The Commission also agreed on the importance of public awareness of the nature and objectives of the investment policies of the two countries.

The two sides agreed to cooperate actively in the development of the Iranian capital market and in the establishment of Iran as a financial center for the region. It was agreed that a financial conference should be held in Tehran before the end of the current year, to which would be invited high officials of the two governments as well as leaders of banking, insurance and other financial institutions.

Substantial progress was made toward conclusion of an Agreement on Cooperation in the Civil Uses of Atomic Energy. This Agreement will provide for a broad exchange of information on the application of atomic energy to peaceful purposes, and for related transfer of equipment and materials, including enriched uranium fuel for Iran's power reactors.

In order to facilitate exchange of technical specialists, the two co-chairmen signed a reciprocal agreement for technical cooperation. Technical cooperation projects were agreed upon in agriculture, manpower, science and higher education, and health services.

The Commission agreed to emphasize scientific programs in the fields of oceanography, seismic studies, geological and mineral surveys, remote sensing applications, and radio astronomy. In the field of higher education and advanced study, the Commission also agreed that the two governments should increase exchanges and develop a network of inter-institutional relationships.

The Commission noted that, concurrent with the meeting of the Commission, agreement in principle was reached between Iranian and U. S. private interests on projects for production of graphite electrodes, sanitary wares and trailers, and for establishment of a hotel chain in Iran.

It was agreed to hold the next meeting of the Joint Commission in Tehran before the end of 1975.

Leader of the Iranian Delegation

Hushang Ansary
Minister of Economic Affairs
and Finance

Leader of the United States Delegation

Henry A. Kissinger
The Secretary of State

* * * * * * *

This Copy For

NEWS CONFERENCE

#160

AT THE WHITE HOUSE
WITH RON NESSEN

AT 11:50 A.M. EDT

MARCH 6, 1975

THURSDAY

MR. NESSEN: Good morning.

Gaylord Shaw is going to go to the L.A. Times.
The L.A. Times' gain is really AP's loss. (Laughter)

Let me read a statement by the President. I
think that we have copies of it. While it is being passed
out, I will read it. It is a statement by the President.

"The act of terrorism which occurred last night at Tel Aviv resulting in the tragic loss of innocent lives should be strongly deplored by everyone. Outrages of this nature can only damage the cause in whose name they are perpetrated.

"I extend my deepest sympathy, and that of the American people, to the families of those persons who have been killed as a result of this senseless act."

Moving on to the day now, we have a fair amount of stuff.

The President held a meeting this morning with Senators Humphrey, Sparkman and Case to discuss aid to Cambodia. Senator Case, as you may know, is the ranking Republican Member of the Subcommittee of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee which will be considering the President's request for $222 million for Cambodia and $300 million for Vietnam.

The meeting was requested by Senator Case to discuss the President's requests. That subcommittee, of which Senator Case is the ranking Republican, will begin hearings this afternoon.

After that, the President met for half an hour with the leaders of the American Petroleum Institute. The purpose was to discuss the petroleum industry's concerns with the President's energy program.

MORE

#160

- 13 -

#160-3/6

Q On a related question, you said the day before that you would check on a question I asked you; that is, whether or not the President's directive for an inquiry into the Arab boycott included this Commerce Department list that the Commerce Department has been keeping for many years, and whether or not any agency had ever monitored the companies on that list to see if they were complying with the boycott or defying the boycott or, in other words, if it was just a list that was kept or whether it led to any action.

You said you would find out whether or not the President wanted that looked into.

MR. NESSEN: I did not find that out yet, Jim.

Q Do you know if it is against the law for the military to segregate by religion assignments to Saudi Arabia?

MR. NESSEN: The military is not segregated by religion on assignments to Saudi Arabia or anywhere else. Someone asked me the other day something about Iceland, I think.

Q That isn't religion, that is a state of mind.

MR. NESSEN: I did check on Iceland, and the answer is that the State Department on November 17, 1961, which was 14 years ago, announced that it was changing a previous policy and would thereafter and has thereafter not discriminated against black officers going to Iceland.

As for the Saudi Arabian question --

Q Black officers.

MR. NESSEN: -- and enlisted men. I have put a mark in here somewhere.

Q You found nothing on Iceland since 1961, and you found no protest by the Icelandic government in recent years?

MR. NESSEN: I was asked about what the policy is, Jim, and the policy since 1961 has been no discrimination against black military men.

Q They are currently being sent to Iceland if their normal assignment calls for them?

MORE

#160

- 14 -

#160-3/6

MR. NESSEN: You will need to check the Pentagon on that. I am not even sure they keep records by race over there, but you need to check with them.

On the question of Saudi Arabia, there is no agreement in any form between the government of the United States and any foreign country to exclude American citizens from serving in that country on religious or ethnic grounds.

As we mentioned the other day, it is established diplomatic policy that any country can refuse entry to a citizen of another country for its own reasons, but I want to emphasize that as far as the American government goes, we do not have a policy of segregation in assignments overseas. Also, we have made these views known to other countries.

Q What was the Corps of Engineers was doing? Was it prescreening the visa applications, and the Saudis would never get the applicants of any Jews. That is what they are going to cut out.

MR. NESSEN: That is what Secretary Schlesinger said the other day. If that is true, he said that he was not aware of it, but that he was going to investigate it thoroughly. If something like that had taken place and disciplinary action was necessary, he would take it.

Q I believe in answer to a question you said you did not know it was against the law or not. My question is, do you now know it?

MR. NESSEN: Whether it is against the law? It is certainly against American policy.

Q Policy and law are two different things.

MR. NESSEN: One of the things that these departments are looking into is what laws are involved in these various things, and those reports have not come back yet.

Q It is really one of the key things we have been trying to establish here over the past several days, because if this practice was going on, regardless of whether or not it violated policy, if it violated a law, that would be something else.

Is there no way you can find out? I understand the President is asking for investigations as to what the laws are, but this has been going on for quite some time. There is no way that you can find out whether there is or is not a law that applies to the prescreening process that the Corps was doing?

MORE

#160

- 15 -

#160-3/6

MR. NESSEN: That is precisely what Secretary Schlesinger said he was doing, and what the Justice Department has been instructed to do.

Q How long does it take them to get a law book and hire a lawyer and have him look it up?

MR. NESSEN: I don't know that, Jim.

Q But another boycott -- our boycott with Cuba -- a few days back when you were asked by Walt whether there was a change in policy as exemplified in Dr. Kissinger's Houston speech, in your answer you said that since the U.S. is a member of the OAS, if they voted to end the trade sanctions against Cuba, the U.S. would be -- and I think this is the phrase he used -- "bound by international law to go along."

I looked into that, and just because we are a member of the OAS doesn't mean we have to go along with that. Is what you were saying and whether you say now that if OAS votes to end the sanctions the U.S. will go along?

MR. NESSEN: I am not saying anything. All I was doing was trying to remind you of what Secretary Kissinger said and what the President said, which are in tune. If you care to, the two paragraphs of Secretary Kissinger's speech which apply read as follows:

"If the OAS sanctions are eventually repealed, the United States will consider changes in its bilateral relations with Cuba and in its regulations. Our decision will be based on what we consider to be in our own best interests and will be heavily influenced by the external policies of the Cuban government.

"We see no virtue in perpetual antagonism between the U.S. and Cuba. Our concerns relate, above all, to Cuban external policies and military relationships with countries outside the hemisphere. We have taken some symbolic steps to indicate that we are prepared to move in a new direction if Cuba will. Fundamental changes cannot come, however, unless Cuba demonstrates a readiness to assume the mutuality of obligation and regard upon which a new relationship must be found."

One of the problems here is that perhaps we have been talking about Secretary Kissinger's speech in terms of headlines and so forth without going back to the exact words. I think you see from the words that what he and the President said were precisely alike.

MORE

#160

PRESS [lc]
DEPARTMENT OF STATE

March 17, 1975

No. 147

REMARKS OF
HIS EXCELLENCY YIGAL ALLON
MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF ISRAEL
AND
THE HONORABLE HENRY A. KISSINGER
SECRETARY OF STATE
FOLLOWING MEETING WITH ISRAELI NEGOTIATING TEAM
AT THE PRIME MINISTER'S OFFICE
JERUSALEM, MARCH 16, 1975

**FOREIGN MINISTER ALLON:** The Secretary of State and myself divided labor among ourselves. I'll speak in Hebrew for the Israeli press and the Secretary will say the same things, I hope, in English.

**FOREIGN MINISTER ALLON** (translated from Hebrew).

We held a detailed conversation for a number of hours with Dr. Kissinger and his group on the Egyptian proposals he brought and we have conveyed to our guest our proposals and evaluation of the proposals he brought to us in accordance with the spirit of government policy from previous sessions and today's session. I say with satisfaction that these talks were held in good spirits and with a positive trend on the part of both parties. But because of the importance of the subject and the great amount of detail, we could not complete the discussion this evening and we will continue tomorrow morning.

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** The Israeli negotiating team and we reviewed all the elements of the negotiations in very great detail, in a very constructive spirit, based on the discussions that took place in the Israeli Cabinet today. The Israeli side presented the Israeli ideas in response to the Egyptian ideas that I brought here from Aswan and I plan to go to Egypt tomorrow to present them. The Israeli and American negotiating team will meet again tomorrow morning.

Thank you.

**QUESTION:** Did you introduce any ideas of your own?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** No.

* * * * * *

PRESS

[L.C.]
Ab Statements

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

March 17, 1975

No. 143

REMARKS BY
THE HONORABLE HENRY A. KISSINGER
SECRETARY OF STATE
FOLLOWING MEETING WITH
ISRAELI NEGOTIATING TEAM
JERUSALEM, ISRAEL

MARCH 14, 1975

We are moving from a discussion of general principles to the examination of concrete ideas. I brought the Egyptian considerations in this regard to the Israeli negotiating team and we reviewed these as well as other aspects of the problem in great detail and in a very comradely, constructive and positive spirit. Tomorrow I am going to Damascus and Amman. Then I will return here Sunday afternoon and we will continue our deliberations and based on those I will return to Egypt.

**QUESTION:** Dr. Kissinger, do you see any very big obstacles that might prevent an agreement from taking place now?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** I think it is premature to predict an agreement. As I said, we are moving from general principles to concrete ideas. So there is some progress being made, but it is premature to predict an agreement.

**QUESTION:** Are you planning to stay in the area until you do get an agreement?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** I am planning to stay in the area until it is known either whether it is possible to get an agreement or whether it is not.

**QUESTION:** Is the problem of non-belligerency still the big sticking point?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** Well, I do not want to talk about any of the specific issues.

Thank you.

* * * * *

PRESS
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Public Statements
[LC]

March 12, 1975

No. 136

REMARKS OF
THE HONORABLE HENRY A. KISSINGER
SECRETARY OF STATE
FOLLOWING MEETING WITH PRIME MINISTER RABIN
JERUSALEM, MARCH 12, 1975

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** We continued our very detailed examination of elements of a possible agreement. In the nature of such an examination we cannot make a progress report every day, but the talks are being conducted in very friendly, very positive spirit and nothing has changed in my estimate of the situation.

**QUESTION:** Are you beginning to see the shape of an agreement even though it is kind of early?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** I just don't want to give any estimates. I'll be back here in a couple of days. I'm going to Aswan...

**QUESTION:** There are reports that you will be here another two weeks longer. What do you say?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** I have absolutely no estimate of how long it could take, but I have some other duties in Washington too.

**QUESTION:** Have you found any areas of agreement between Israel and Egypt?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** I just won't go into anything.

**QUESTION:** Does that mean you might break off the talks and go back to Washington and then return?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** No. I think that we will know within a reasonable time frame what is achievable and I don't believe it will be necessary for me to go back and then return here.

* * * * *

PRESS
Public Statements
DEPARTMENT OF STATE

March 10, 1975

No. 129

REMARKS OF
THE HONORABLE HENRY A. KISSINGER
SECRETARY OF STATE
FOLLOWING MEETING WITH PRIME MINISTER RABIN
AT THE PRIME MINISTER'S OFFICE
JERUSALEM, MARCH 10, 1975

As you know, we are at the beginning of the process of negotiations which are complicated and which will take some time. We are engaged here in analyzing all the ideas and elements that might be part of a possible agreement and we are doing so with great care. We have done so in a very friendly, very comradely and very positive atmosphere. I am going to Ankara this afternoon and I am returning tomorrow evening-- back to meet again tomorrow evening to continue this examination of the ideas and the elements of the possible agreement.

**QUESTION:** Dr. Kissinger, you said the chances were 50-50 before you started out. Would you say they are better now or worse now?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** I don't want to be in a position in which every day I have to give an assessment and a percentage figure because we will be in a hopeless trap after awhile. I came here because I believed that an agreement is possible. I have no reason to change my mind.

**QUESTION:** Do you have any assessment of how long this mission will last?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** I don't want to put myself into any particular time frame because it is an agreement of some importance; if it is achieved, it has to be done with great care.

++++++

March 10, 1975

No. 128

REMARKS OF
HIS EXCELLENCY YIGAL ALLON
MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF ISRAEL
AND
THE HONORABLE HENRY A. KISSINGER
SECRETARY OF STATE
UPON ARRIVAL BEN GURION AIRPORT

MARCH 9, 1975

FOREIGN MINISTER ALLON: I would like to welcome Secretary of State Kissinger and Mrs. Kissinger and their colleagues on this visit of theirs which is already part of the great effort for achieving political progress in the area. It is quite natural that my colleagues and myself are very much interested to hear what Dr. Kissinger has to tell us about his impressions from his visits and talks in the neighboring Arab capitals.

I only hope that what he has to tell us would be more constructive and more hopeful than what the Arab media has to tell us from across the lines. Because as you know we are people who will never give up the idea of peace and would like to see progress taking place as soon as possible.

SECRETARY KISSINGER: Mr. Foreign Minister: It is a great pleasure to be back in Israel again. We are here to see whether together we can make some progress towards peace. I will report to the Israeli Cabinet about my discussions in Egypt, also my discussions in Syria, and we will then see whether we can develop jointly some ideas that might provide the basis for further discussions.

Thank you.

* * * * * * * * * *

PRESS
DEPARTMENT OF STATE

March 10, 1975

No. 126

EXCHANGE OF TOASTS BETWEEN
THE HONORABLE HENRY A. KISSINGER
SECRETARY OF STATE
AND HIS EXCELLENCY 'ABD AL-HALIM KHADDAM
MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF SYRIA
AT A LUNCHEON IN HONOR OF THE FOREIGN MINISTER

DAMASCUS, SYRIA

MARCH 9, 1975

## Secretary Kissinger

I would like to express the great pleasure we have in welcoming the Foreign Minister, Mrs. Khaddam and all our other Syrian friends to the American Embassy. I had the pleasure of first meeting the Foreign Minister in December 1973. Since then I have been in Damascus about 30 times. I am one of the world's great experts on the route from the airport to the guest house, and on the tactics of the Foreign Minister, which consist of going on the attack immediately upon my arrival. In fact, I want to compliment him. He has compressed the time schedule now, and he can get into a full attack from a standing start in ten seconds. [Laughter] I can say with assurance that whatever else may happen in Syrian-American relations, it will not be due to the inadequate defense of Syrian interest by the Syrian officials that I have encountered.

In the year and a half that we have had the privilege of meeting, I have learned to understand the Syrian point of view, the Syrian pride, the Syrian dedication to its principles. We have worked together on one agreement, and while it was a difficult negotiation, I think it brought our two countries closer together. As I continue the American efforts in this area, it is based on the conviction that a lasting peace in the Middle East must include all of the concerned countries. This is our basic attitude in whatever contribution we can make to lasting peace. In the process, I believe that Syrian-American relations have dramatically improved, and we will do whatever is in our power so they will continue to improve. As we have learned to work together in mutual respect and growing understanding, I am confident we can surmount whatever difficulties exist from time to time. I have greatly appreciated the opportunity of working with the Foreign Minister, General Shihabi, and of course with President Asad and others here. I would like to propose a toast to the friendship between the Syrian and American people.

## Foreign Minister Khaddam

Mr. Secretary, Ladies and Gentlemen:

From the bottom of my heart I thank you on behalf of myself and my colleagues and friends of the Syrian side for this gracious invitation to the residence of the American Embassy. And I also thank you for the gracious words you have uttered in appreciation of the good relations between the United States

PR #126

-2-

and Syria. You have referred to your repeated visits to our country, and I believe that during this period and through these visits you have come to appreciate and understand what we feel and how we feel about certain things.

As President Asad said ever since the first meeting, I would like to re- iterate that our country wants and strive for peace. We have worked, we are still working, and we will continue to work toward the realization of a just peace. We were very clear when we said that peace means to us: first, the preservation for the Palestinian people of their legitimate rights; secondly, the complete withdrawal of Israeli forces from our occupied lands. And it is from this angle that we view efforts in this direction toward a just solution, and from this angle appears the com- prehensive look at a just peace. That is why we in Syria and the rest of the Arab countries want just and permanent peace. And it was on this basis that we welcomed all the efforts that were spent within this frame- work and in this direction.

I wish you, Mr. Secretary, and you, Mrs. Kissinger, a very good sojourn in our country. And I would like to emphasize and assure you that our country stretches out the arm of friendship to meet the arm of friendship extended by any other country in the same spirit. We stretch out this arm of friendship toward any country which shares with us mutual respect and which has mutual interests with us. In this connection, reference must be made to the efforts made by Dr. Kissinger to return to normalcy the relations between Syria and the United States of America.

Finally, I raise my glass in a toast to Secretary Kissinger, Mrs. Kissinger and to all our other American guests here.

* * * * *

PRESS

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

March 10, 1975

No. 126

Secretary Kissinger

Foreign Minister Khaddam

PR #126

-2-

* * * * *

PRESS
DEPARTMENT OF STATE

Public Statements

March 10, 1975

No. 123

REMARKS TO MEMBERS OF THE PRESS BY
THE HONORABLE HENRY A. KISSINGER
SECRETARY OF STATE
AND HIS EXCELLENCY ANWAR AL-SADAT
PRESIDENT OF THE ARAB REPUBLIC OF EGYPT
FOLLOWING THEIR SECOND MEETING
ASWAN, EGYPT
MARCH 8, 1975

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** As you know, the President and I have had extensive talks today, partly alone and partly together with our associates, to review all the elements that are involved in making another step towards peace in the Middle East. I will now go first to Syria and then to Israel, and I will discuss there a similar range of issues regarding the elements of another step. I will then return for further discussions with the President on Tuesday or Wednesday. I am here because the United States believes very strongly that another step towards peace in the Middle East is in the interest of all of the peoples of the Middle East and of the world, and we are dedicated to making a major effort in this direction. I believe, based on the discussions that I have had, progress is possible.

**QUESTION:** Have you discussed, Mr. Secretary, any possibility of another disengagement on the Syrian front?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** We discussed the whole range of problems involved with peace in the Middle East, and of course that includes all fronts.

**QUESTION:** Mr. Secretary, are you bringing concrete ideas to Israel that you have picked up here from President Sadat?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** Obviously in discussions with the Israelis we will be discussing ideas and elements of a possible step. I don't think the origin of these ideas and elements is of decisive importance.

**QUESTION:** Mr. President, do you think enough progress has been made to make you optimistic about a settlement?

**PRESIDENT SADAT:** Well, as I said before, I am always optimistic, but I think we shall be having a very hard round this time.

**QUESTION:** Did you discuss the Palestinian question, Mr. Kissinger?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** I said we discussed the whole range of issues in the Middle East.

**QUESTION:** Mr. President, when you said a "hard round," do you think it will take a long time? Do you think it might take three or four weeks?

PR #123

-2-

**PRESIDENT SADAT:** Well, I shall be very happy to have Dr. Kissinger as long as he can afford to stay with me, but it is not a matter of weeks or so. As I said before, the mission of my friend Dr. Kissinger is very important this time because we are working on two very important points. The first point is the defusion of the explosive situation; the second is pushing the process of peace. For that I am saying it is the hardest.

**QUESTION:** Mr. President, you said recently that you think now, for the first time, peace is possible. Can you please say what changed to make it such at this time? What elements have changed?

**PRESIDENT SADAT:** Well, I did not say this yesterday, or a week before. I said it a year before when I met Dr. Kissinger when we fulfilled the first disengagement agreement. My theory is this: for 26 years we have never enjoyed any confidence in Israel; and the same thing happened, that Israel never enjoyed any confidence in us. The moment came when Dr. Kissinger appeared on the stage, and he enjoyed my full confidence. I think it must be mentioned also that he should enjoy the full confidence of Israel after all that he has done for Israel, and all that the United States has done. So I am saying, for the first time in 26 years peace is possible.

**QUESTION:** Mr. President, do you think that no form of warfare is useful in the Arab-Israeli conflict?

**PRESIDENT SADAT:** This is quite true from my point of view, and I think the October war has proved that whatever power any party has, it cannot impose conditions on the other.

**QUESTION:** What about other forms of warfare, Mr. President?

**PRESIDENT SADAT:** Well, do you have in mind what you call preventive war?

**QUESTION:** Economic warfare.

**PRESIDENT SADAT:** When we discuss peace, we shall be discussing peace in all its dimensions. But let us first defuse the explosive situation; then after that we can discuss it.

**QUESTION:** Mr. President, could you say that after your talks today you feel things look harder than they did before your talks today?

**PRESIDENT SADAT:** Well, my friend, it is true that I feel that this time it is harder. It is true.

**QUESTION:** Is it harder, Mr. President, because you want to go further this time than you did last time in the range of what you are trying to achieve?

**PRESIDENT SADAT:** Well, as I told you, what we want to achieve this time is keeping the momentum of the peace cause and defusing the explosive situation.

**QUESTION:** Are the prospects better or worse after today's talks?

**PRESIDENT SADAT:** I cannot tell until Dr. Kissinger returns.

**QUESTION:** Mr. President, is the question of a written non-war pledge by Egypt a negotiable issue as far as you are concerned?

PR #123

-3-

**PRESIDENT SADAT:** We have not discussed this yet. We have not reached it. But do you mean non-belligerency? As I told you, if I am going to agree to non-belligerency while there is one Israeli soldier occupying my land, this would mean an official invitation to continue occupying my land, and I am not going to extend this invitation.

**QUESTION:** Mr. Secretary, do you expect the Geneva Conference to meet soon?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** We have always stated our readiness to go to Geneva. When I met Foreign Minister Gromyko in Geneva last week, we indicated that we were prepared for an early resumption at an early date.

**QUESTION:** Have you discussed the visit of President Sadat to the United States?

**SECRETARY KISSINGER:** President Sadat knows that he is always welcome, and I hope that after we conclude these negotiations we will be able to arrange some firm date.

* * * * * * *