S/S-7616335

THE SECRETARY OF STATE
WASHINGTON

July 29, 1976

Copies to: Dear Mr. Fiedler:

S
RF'
(dtm)

It was a pleasure to hear that the National Counter-
Intelligence Corps Association is holding its 30th Annual
Convention this weekend in Valley Forge.

I recall with pride my own service with the 84th
Infantry during World War II, and remember with great
respect the many contributions of the officers and
men of the counter-intelligence corps.

Please give my best wishes to everyone at the
convention.

Mr. Otto Fiedler,
Chairman of the Board of Governors,
National Counter-Intelligence Corps Association,
Stouffer's Valley Forge Hotel,
King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.

JUNIOR FOREIGN SERVICE OFFICERS CLUB

C/O FOREIGN SERVICE LOUNGE
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20520

June 3, 1974

Dear Mr. Secretary and Mrs. Kissinger:

On behalf of the Leadership Council of the Junior Foreign Service Officers Club (JFSOC), I would like to invite you and Mrs. Kissinger to be our guests of honor at the annual Fourth of July Celebration hosted jointly by JFSOC and the International Junior Diplomats of Washington. Since this is one of the few opportunities we have to extend an invitation for a social event in the Department to young diplomats serving in Washington, we feel that your attendance would demonstrate the interest of the United States and the Department in encouraging improved international understanding among future world statesmen. Your presence would also highlight the fact that this July we are celebrating the 50th anniversary of the unified Foreign Service.

I am sure that you and Mrs. Kissinger would find the evening, which has become something of a tradition among junior diplomats here, to be both stimulating and enjoyable, and I hope that you will give consideration to accepting our invitation. The festivities will begin at 8:00 P.M., and as in the past, will be held in the diplomatic reception area of the Department.

Thomas Apostle
National President

Patricia Lockwood
President
Abigail Girls

Credentials
Leonard Kohl

The Hon. James J. Farley
The Hon. John V. Lindsey
The Hon. Eugene Levy
The Hon. Jacob Javits

Chapter Chairmen

Arizona
Hugh Downs

California
George Duncan

Connecticut
Dr. Robert Freedman

Dist. of Columbia
Ms. Connie McCarthy

Florida
Sydney Broadman
Phyllis Hudson

Illinois
Dr. Harry Kair

Chicago, Illinois
Leonard Chandler

Maryland
David S. Orem

Mexico
Evans Apostle

Missouri
Randall Lockwood,
Historian

New City, New York
The Hon. Paul Mundt

New Jersey
James Fury

North Carolina
Dorr Depew

Ohio
R. M. Thomas

Ottowa, Canada
Victor Apostle

So. Dakota
Gov. Richard F. Kneip

Tennessee
Mrs. Guy Stuart

Texas
Phyllis Hudson

Counsel
Jerome Trachtenberg
Arthur Klein

Birthday Party
Co-ordinators
Victor Perruna
Dom Perruna
Victor Haubner
Joe Shelly

the national
MILLARD FILLMORE
society

(914)356-5522

43n. Madison Avenue,
Spring Valley, New York 10977
P.O. BOX 308

The Honorable Henry A. Kissinger
Secretary of State
State Department
Washington, D.C.

Dear Sir:

We are particularly pleased to request the honor of your
presence at our 10th Annual Millard Fillmore Birthday Celebration.
It will be the 175th birthday of our late 13th President and it
promises to be one of our more outstanding birthday parties.

As you know, our Society was founded to perpetuate and to
honor the memory of this fine gentleman whose accomplishments
have spurred young people to heights they might not otherwise
have known through our Millard Fillmore Scholarships for Under-
achievers.

As always, the birthday party will be on January 7th, 1975,
at Perruna's Restaurant, Main Street, Spring Valley, New York, from
noon on. A buffet luncheon will be served at $5.00 each, with the
proceeds going to our scholarship fund.

We sincerely hope you will be able to join us for this gala
event and to toast the memory of one of America's more noteworthy
Presidents.

ALABAMA AIR NATIONAL GUARD

117TH RECONNAISSANCE TECHNICAL SQUADRON
SUMPTER SMITH ANG BASE BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA 35217

REPLY TO: Recent Visit
ATTN OF: 
SUBJECT: Alabama Visitation

TO: Henry Kissinger
Secretary of State
Washington D.C.

We the members of the Air National Guard appreciated your recent visit to our fair city. After processing and printing pictures of you, we thought although that they were not that good that we would send the best copies to you and hope in all sincerity that you would enjoy them. The photographs were taken by Airman Logan of the 106th Photo Lab, processed by SSgt Nathan Thomas, Jr., and printed by Airman Fincher, both of the 117th Recon Tech Group, Birmingham, Alabama. Again we thank you for the courtesy allowed us in taking the pictures.

Ssgt Nathan Thomas, Jr.

Airman 1st Class R. Fincher

Airman 1st Class Bill Logan

American Association
for the Advancement of Science

1515 MASSACHUSETTS AVENUE, NW, WASHINGTON, D. C. 20005

Phone: 467-4400 (Area Code 202)

Cable Address: Advancesci, Washington, D. C.

4 April 1975

The Honorable Henry A. Kissinger
Secretary of State
Washington, D. C. 20520

Dear Mr. Secretary:

We are in the process of updating our photography files. We would appreciate your sending us your most recent photograph for possible publication in SCIENCE or another journal which may wish to borrow from our files.

ANNUAL MEETING • BOSTON • FEBRUARY 18-24 1976

FINLEY, R. Michael

OFFICE OF
THE SECRETARY OF STATE
WASHINGTON

May 18, 1974

Dear Mr. Finley:

Many thanks for your recent note enclosing an
invitation for Secretary Kissinger to attend commence-
ment at Florida International University.

The Secretary is grateful for this invitation and
appreciates Congressman Fascell's interest. He
holds the University in high regard and is honored by
its offer of a degree of Doctor of International Laws.

We have gone over his schedule carefully in
the hope of finding some way for him to attend. I
regret to report, however, that his current travels,
the upcoming Moscow Summit and a very heavy load
of work here at the Department make it impossible
for him to attend this or any other commencement
activity this year.

Again, Secretary Kissinger appreciates the
invitation and is sorry he will not be able to accept.

Mr. R. Michael Finley,
Committee on Foreign Affairs,
House of Representatives.

Congress of the United States
Committee on Foreign Affairs
House of Representatives

April 30, 1974

Mr. Lawrence S. Eagleburger
Department of State
Washington, D.C.

Dear Mr. Eagleburger:

Enclosed is the letter which I discussed with
you today. I know Congressman Fascell would be most
appreciative if the Secretary could accept the
University's invitation.

Kindest regards.

7625553

THE SECRETARY OF STATE

WASHINGTON

December 12, 1976

Dear Leonard:

Nancy and I want to thank you and
Barbara once more for your warm and gracious
hospitality. Our stay with you was perfectly
delightful, and I am deeply grateful for all
that you did to make everything run so smoothly
and effectively. I especially appreciated your
giving up your quarters to make us so welcome
and comfortable.

We join in sending you both our
happiest wishes for Christmas and the
New Year, and I hope that our paths will cross
in the days ahead.

The Honorable
Leonard K. Firestone,
American Ambassador,
Brussels.

HAMILTON FISH

11 WEST 42ND STREET, NEW YORK, N.Y. 10036, ROOM 601

TELEPHONE: (212) 354-1833

December 23, 1976

Hon. Henry Kissinger
Secretary of State
2201 C St., N.W.
Washington, D.C.

Dear Mr. Kissinger:

I just want to thank you for seeing me about strengthening our nuclear defense so that no nation would ever dare attack us. If we don't, I honestly believe within the next five years, it will amount to self-suicide.

I urged the creation of 100 SS 9's of 25 megatons as being sufficient but that may be difficult under the existing budget, so I am urging that we deduct sufficient funds from the defense budget to build ten SS 9's, starting immediately and continue each year to build ten more until we have 50, hidden in caves and protected scientifically. Fifty could destroy all of Russia and the Russian Politburo and military know it. So even with fifty they would not dare to press the button as much as they would like to, within the next five years. Even 25 could destroy most of their large cities and their military and naval centers and big nuclear weapons.

Nuclear war is an entirely new game and all other military or naval defense amounts to almost nothing except submarines and maybe some airplanes. Unless those in authority realize the total destruction of nuclear war and that it is an entirely new game and take immediate steps to strengthen our nuclear defense, we are inviting total destruction or a policy of surrender or die. A first strike by Russia's 300 SS 9's or 18's would make our retaliation very limited, including submarines, not more than ten percent and possibly less.

I hope to God I am wrong but I have spent seven years in talking with the biggest scientists, Admirals, Generals and top authorities and that is the general opinion except among some politicians who apparently believe in covering up the facts to the American people which in my opinion is a form of treason. Time is running out on freedom and the lives of the American people.

Wishing you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

THREE NEW VANTAGE TITLES

*By the Hon. Hamilton Fish, LL.D.*

The Hon. Hamilton Fish served in Congress from 1920-45 and participated actively as ranking Republican member on the Foreign Affairs and the Rules Committees.

**F.D.R. THE OTHER SIDE OF THE COIN—HOW WE WERE TRICKED INTO WORLD WAR II** should be read by everyone interested in the truth of our involvement in World War II. It reveals how after winning the war we lost the peace at Yalta when an ailing and sick President turned over half the world to Stalin and Communism. ($8.95). Lowell Thomas called it sensational.

**NEW YORK STATE THE BATTLEGROUND OF THE REVOLUTIONARY WAR** is one of the best and most informative books written about New York's participation in winning the War of Independence. It will appeal to all Americans interested in the Bicentennial and in the history of their country. ($7.95).

**THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE LIVING ON TOP OF A NUCLEAR VOLCANO** will appeal to all Americans who, regardless of politics, are interested in the survival of their families and their country. ($6.50).

*Several of these books will be among the best-sellers.*

Mr. Fish has spent over ten years in arduous, conscientious and painstaking research in order to document the facts in these books.

At all book stores or post-paid from Vantage Press, Inc., 516 West 34th Street, New York, N.Y. 10001.

The New York Times Book Review/October 3, 1976

OFFICERS

Co-Chairmen
Frank E. Wall, Jr.
Tom E. Paro
Gerald W. Siegel

Secretary
Arline M. Neal

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

George W. Apperson
Mrs. John S. Brown
Leon Brown
Vincent G. Burke, Jr.
Dr. Leonard F. Cain
Monsignor Leo J. Coady
Ralph W. Frey
Mrs. Joanne T. Goldsmith
Rabbi Joshua O. Haberman
Theodore R. Hagans, Jr.
Chief of Police John B. Holihan
Ms. Elda R. Inoue
James T. Lyndall
Walter F. McArdle
Raymond J. McDonough
Mrs. Robert G. McGuire, Jr.
Jane E. Marilley
Lavell Merritt
William C. Murphy
Arline M. Neal
Norman W. Nickens
Tom E. Paro
Mrs. B. Michael Rauh
Gerald W. Siegel
Bert Silver
Jean H. Sisco
Robert M. Smalley
Robert Smith
Mrs. Kathryn H. Stone
Carrie L. Thornhill
Frank E. Wall, Jr.
Thomas M. Walsh
Dr. Henry S. Wicker
Larry C. Williams
Seymour D. Wolf

Advisory Members of the Board
Grace Baisinger
Joseph B. Danzansky
Joseph D. Keenan
Mrs. Richard K. Lyon
H. Graham Morison
Arthur G. Newmyer, Jr.
Henry K. Willard, II
Jerry V. Wilson

Prince George's County School—
Community Relations Program
4165 Branch Avenue
Marlow Heights, Maryland 20031
Telephone: 423-4255

Alexandria School—
Community Relations Program
4345 Duke Street
Alexandria, Virginia 22304
Telephone: 751-4747

Alexandria Police—
Youth Program
Parker Gray Middle School
1207 Madison Street
Alexandria, Virginia
Telephone: 549-5681 X 62

President
Dr. David Hyatt

Executive Director
Donald F. Sullivan

National Capital Area Region

THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF CHRISTIANS AND JEWS, INC.

735 Southern Building, 1425 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20005

628-9141

April 19, 1976

The Hon. Henry Kissinger
SECRETARY of STATE
2201 C Street, N. W.
Washington, D. C. 20520

Dear Mr. Secretary:

Enclosed please find a picture which you graciously allowed my daughter to snap at the BROTHERHOOD DINNER of The National Conference of Christians and Jews, Inc., held at The Shoreham Americana on March 18, 1976. I understand from our downtown office that you agreed to autograph any pictures of the dinner that are sent to you and I would appreciate it, more than I could say, if you would autograph the enclosed for my daughter.

If you are able to make the autograph personal, the information is as follows:

✓ **Name:** BETSY EAGLESTON
**Date:** Thursday, March 18, 1976
**Place:** The Shoreham Americana Hotel, Washington, D. C.
**Occasion:** Twenty-Seventh Annual Brotherhood Citation Dinner.

I was hospitalized at the time of the dinner and so missed meeting you and Mr. Linowitz. My daughter was taking my place.

Thank you for your consideration.

Please reply to:

PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY office, NCCJ
4165 Branch Avenue, #210
Marlow Heights, Maryland 20031
TELEPHONE: 423-4255

The National Conference of Christians and Jews is a civic organization, engaged in programs designed to resolve urgent intergroup relations problems, with a view to securing justice and equal opportunity for all. NCCJ's operations in the National Capital Area Region include programs concerned with interreligious relations, equal employment opportunity, police-community relations, problems related to school desegregation, and a number of efforts designed to build positive and meaningful relations between the diverse groups which constitute the Washington metropolitan area. NCCJ is supported by bequests and contributions which are tax deductible.

Registered under the D.C. Charitable Act. Certificate of Registration #6-07-48

NCCJ

JACOB STEIN

LICENSED REAL ESTATE BROKER
20 JERUSALEM AVENUE
HICKSVILLE, NEW YORK 11801

---

516 938-6012

September 10, 1974

To The Editor of
Commentary Magazine
165 East 56th Street
New York, New York 10022

Dear Sir:

I want to comment on the "Kissinger and Yom Kippur War" article which appeared in the September issue of Commentary with particular regard to the implication that the American Jewish Community was restrained in its political representations to our government by Dr. Kissinger's "handling" of Simcha Dinitz, Israel's Ambassador to the United States.

I write from the vantage point of having served as Chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations representing the collective political position of almost the totality of the American Jewish Community.

Within several hours of the outbreak of the Yom Kippur War on October 6th, as Chairman of the Conference, I sent a telegram to Secretary Kissinger calling on the government "to provide all supportive assistance to Israel in this critical hour..."

On Saturday night, the Policy Committee on the Presidents Conference met to plan for the days ahead and on Sunday, we brought together at the Plaza Hotel in New York 300 Jewish leaders from across the country to hear Foreign Minister Abba Eban and to advise all pre-sent of the need " to communicate by letters and telegrams to Congressmen, to the Secretary of State and to the President urging our government to provide supportive assistance to Israel to the extent and of the nature required."

On Monday, October 8th, heads of our member organizations issued statements and addressed communications to their members urging contact with Congress and the Administration for immediate support for Israel.

Editor,
Commentary Magazine

-2-

September 10, 1974

On Tuesday morning, October 9th, in my quarters at the Shoreham
Hotel in Washington, we addressed a letter to President Nixon
calling for the immediate replacement of all Israel's military
losses and such other supportive assistance as may be required.
This letter was signed by myself as Chairman of the Presidents
Conference, Max Fisher, Chairman of the Council of Jewish
Federations and Welfare Funds, David Blumberg, President of Bnai
Brith, Mr. Louis Gole, President of the National Jewish Community
Relations Advisory Council, Rabbi Arthur Hertzberg, President of
the American Jewish Congress, Mrs. Charlotte Jacobsen, President
of the American Section of the World Zionist Organization, Mrs.
Rose Matzkin, President of Hadassah and Rabbi Israel Miller,
President of the American Zionist Federation.

This letter was hand delivered to the White House by Max Fisher
and by 6 P.M. Tuesday evening, Mr. Fisher advised us that he had
been informed by the White House that Israel would have all mili-
tary losses replaced.

During the course of Tuesday, October 9th, the Presidents Conference
gathered together 1,000 organizational leaders from across the
country to hear Ambassador Dinitz and to hear the first responses
of political leaders to the communications which they had been
receiving from their Jewish constituents across the country.

Senator Charles Percy advised us "Israel strongly requires the
total support of all her friends in this country."

Senator McGovern said "We should also reiterate our commitment to
provide Israel with military supplies in the full amounts required
to deter further aggression."

Senator Kennedy told the gathering "This nation has been pledged
to assure the people of Israel the arms they need to defend that
independence...and I say that we will stand by that pledge today,
tomorrow and for however long it takes for all nations to accept
the existence and the independence of the State of Israel."

Senator Schweiker of Pennsylvania spoke out in favor of immediate
support of Israel. He said "If we turn our back on Israel, we
turn our backs on America and on the beliefs which made this nation
great, we turn our backs on the cause of freedom and self determination."

Editor,
Commentary Magazine

-3-

September 10, 1974

During this period, Senator Jackson and many others were bringing pressure for the immediate resupply of Israel's military needs. For the balance of the first week of the war, the Presidents Conference leadership and the heads of every member organization were in contact with administration officials, Senators and Congressmen bringing pressure to commence an immediate military resupply to Israel, with particular emphasis at that time on Phantom Aircraft.

On Saturday, October 13th, we received official word that a massive resupply airlift was underway.

I detail this information to reject and repudiate the impression developed by the authors that the political leadership of the American Jewish Community was restrained or muted by Ambassador Dinitz or the Israel Embassy in Washington.

We have an obligation to our constituency to be fully informed on each issue with which we deal so that we can arrive at a policy, a program, a course of action, which we feel best suits the goals we wish to achieve and which reflects the will of our constituency. The American Jewish Community has its own heartbeat and our leaders a deep sense of responsibility to be authentic and effective.

The success of Dr. Kissinger in his negotiations with Israel and the Arab countries was due in large measure to his absolute candor. It is difficult to accept the authors reading of "coins and epigraphs" that finds Dr. Kissinger practiced duplicity and manipulation, from which would follow an inevitable loss of ability to further negotiate with the parties and a sorely damaged credibility at home.

If the actions the authors attribute to Dr. Kissinger are indeed fact then very well-laid plans have failed. For while the Arab war against Israel may be enjoying a military hiatus, the economic war of the Arabs against the United States - waged by extortionate oil pricing and producing policies - continues.

In a continuing series of meetings we had with Dr. Kissinger revolving about events of the Yom Kippur War, he spoke with us in total frankness and with candor and sincerity, and we felt fortunate that so able a person was our Secretary of State. We

Editor,
Commentary Magazine

-4-

September 10, 1974

have seen no evidence to raise a question of the integrity of Dr. Kissinger or to support the authors thesis that Ambassador Dinitz was "handled" by Dr. Kissinger and manipulated into a conspiracy of silence.

The American Jewish Community is proud of the role it played during those critical days, of its prompt, aggressive and continued pressure on Congress and the Administration for full support of Israel, and we welcomed the response of our government.

We are honored that Israel has sent to the United States an Ambassador of such competence, dedication and human responses as Ambassador Dinitz and one who we believe has conducted his affairs during that critical week in a skillful and effective manner.

JS:dl

[L.C]

## Editorial Page

# The Detroit News

Published Daily and Sunday by The Evening News Association

PETER B. CLARK, President and Publisher

JAMES T. DORRIS

Vice-President and General Manager

RICHARD B. WALLACE

Treasurer

JOHN W. HARMS

Vice-President and Director of Marketing

RICHARD M. SPITZLEY

Senior Vice-President

V. LEONARD HANNA

Vice-President—Finance and Control

ROBERT C. NELSON

Vice-President and Operations Manager

MARTIN S. HAYDEN, Vice-President and Editor

WILBUR E. ELSTON

Associate Editor—Editorial Page

ROBERT E. LUBECK

Associate Editor—Features

PAUL A. POORMAN

Managing Editor

ALBERT L. ABBOTT

Associate Editor—Communications

4-A—Saturday, September 21, 1974

## The CIA in Chile

### A dilemma for U.S.

The charge that the Central Intelligence Agency was authorized to spend up to $11 million in undercover funds against the late President Salvador Allende of Chile has started a new controversy in this country.

The details were first reported by Rep. Michael Harrington, D-Mass., a CIA critic, in a confidential letter to House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Thomas Morgan, D-Pa., which was leaked to newsmen. The letter was based on the testimony of CIA Director William E. Colby to a closed meeting of a House Armed Services subcommittee.

Unfortunately, intelligence operations are seldom appreciated by the general public, which tends to believe with Woodrow Wilson in open covenants openly arrived at, but they still are necessary because of the kind of world in which we live.

Colby has explained it this way:

> "In a world which can destroy itself through misunderstanding or miscalculation, it is important that our leaders have a clear perception of the motives, intentions and strategies of other powers. These kinds of insights cannot be obtained only through technical means or analysis. From closed societies they can only be obtained by secret intelligence operations, without which our country must risk subordination to possible adversaries."

We agree with Colby that intelligence operations in foreign countries can be justified but there are at least three other questions involved in this controversy. One is whether the CIA should become involved in operations to defeat or overthrow foreign governments. The second is whether Congress can or should, exercise strict control over the CIA. And the third is how much can and should be reported to Congress and the public about intelligence operations.

President Ford has said intelligence operations such as those in Chile "help implement foreign policy and protect national security." The CIA money, he contended, was used principally "to

help and assist the preservation of opposition newspapers and electronic media and to preserve opposition political parties" under attack by the Allende regime.

Secretary of State Kissinger also said the CIA's involvement had been authorized solely to help keep alive political parties and news media threatened by the Allende government. Like the President, he denied the activities were aimed at subverting the Chilean government.

But critics replied that even at the time of the overthrow of the Allende government nearly two dozen radio stations and all major political parties were still operating in Chile. And the New York Times weighed in with new charges that the CIA had financed striking labor unions and trade groups in Chile for 18 months before Allende was overthrown.

Some members of Congress now have proposed a new congressional committee to oversee the CIA. And Mr. Ford has promised to meet with congressional committees to see whether they want any change in the intelligence review process.

The trouble is, of course, that in national security matters, as in all others, Congress tends to be a sieve. The current flap over the CIA operations in Chile proves it. As noted earlier, it was a congressman who first revealed the confidential testimony to reporters.

Communist governments already are using the incident to blacken the reputation of the United States. Yet the USSR and Communist China spend much more than this country does on covert operations in foreign nations—but rarely admit their connection with such operations.

This country obviously needs controls over intelligence operations but the operations themselves won't be of much value if everything has to be approved by Congress and the results made public. That is the dilemma that Congress and Mr. Ford must wrestle with in arriving at a resolution of the intelligence issue.

ARTICLE BY GEORGE S. GREGORY

April, 1976

THE PRICE WE PAY

As I forecasted in my article published in "Le Journal du
Parliament" last July, the behavior and the attitude of the new
congress elected as a result of the Watergate affair was bound
to weaken the presidency to such an extent that it handicapped
the administration in carrying out many vital decisions in its
domestic affairs, but particularly in its foreign policy.

The result of it was a tremendous decline in the prestige
of the United States in the last two years, not only in the eyes
of our adversaries, but of our friends as well, and was certainly
due to the stupid, selfish and partisan behavior of some of our
liberal legislators. By their refusal to go along with the
President's request for allocation of the promised funds for mili-
tary help to South Viet Nam, the United States has delivered to
the Communists on a golden platter, three countries, South Viet
Nam, Laos and Cambodia, one after another.

Our staunch ally in that corner of the world, Thailand,
falling under Communist pressure and mounting anti-American
propaganda, was forced to oust our military forces manning
seven major air bases and other vital American installations
from their territory.

Even the retaining of one air base for our transit flights
to the Indian Ocean (recently penetrated by the Russian fleet)
was since refused to us as well. The entire position of
the United States in Southeast Asia became almost totally
deteriorated in such a relatively short period of time?

Our congressmen still don't want to learn their lesson. Once again they recently refused the administration's request for the granting of a relatively small amount for military help in Angola. That could at least have served as some warning to our adversaries as well as some encouragement to the friendly-to-us forces over there. Such a refusal takes place at a time when we are spending $110 billion a year for our military budget to enable us to conserve the global balance of power. In Kissinger's endeavor to try to find some suitable solution to the Angola conflict, he was put in a position, by congress' refusal, of sitting empty handed around the bargaining table with Breshnev.

Once again the Russians have succeeded in their usual indirect aggression. They have this time used Castro's forces to establish a military foothold on the African continent, with all its adverse strategic economic and political consequences for the western world.

Who, under such circumstances, whether in Moscow or among the French or Italian Communist leaders, would fear the United States--a country which permitted Communist tanks to triumph in Indochina and Angola, and is idly watching their little Red neighbor's military interference in a territory 6,000 miles away from its borders? It looks rather like another kind of Munich--this time in Africa and represents a very dangerous precedent for future Communist penetrations.

It was rather amazing after all that to see our forum of peace --the United Nations coming out with a resolution condemning

- 2 -

South Africa as the only aggressor in Angola - that, at a time when 12,000 Cuban soldiers are still stationed in that territory with the South African forces having already been withdrawn.

The same stupid policy is being followed by our legislators towards our ally and partner in NATO, Turkey. By blocking deliveries of the military equipment bought by that country from us and even partly paid for in advance by them, Congress has succeeded in spoiling the very cordial relationships which existed for decades between us and Turkey. We were faced with the possible loss of the most important and most strategic military bases in that so vital-for-us corner of the free world. More than a year of discussions has gone on between the administration and the congress for the lifting of this embargo. In their reaction to our behavior, our Turkish allies had, in the meantime, closed part of our military bases. Due to the obstacles of the Congress which have continued to drag on for such a long time, the price we had to pay for the reopening of same and straightening out our relationship has now become much higher.

Unfortunately, in this question as well as in others, the congressmen who have to make the decisions are mostly interested in the effect such decisions will have on the electoral votes. The American voters of Greek origin are more numerous than the Turkish ones.

When one adds to these congressional blunders the manner in which the senate investigating committees are handling the hearings about CIA activities and the foreign payoff cases, one can easily understand the reason for such a deterioration of our prestige and standing around the world since the Watergate affair.

- 3 -

The secret information which is being leaked from the
senate committees to the press about the CIA activities, has
already resulted in the assassination of the head of this
organization in Greece.

The headlines about the financial help granted by the
CIA to the Christian Democrat and Socialist parties in Italy
are certainly being effectively used by the Communist party
as powerful propaganda material to undermine the standing of
the Italian government as well as these parties.

The senate investigations, with all their publicity in
the press about involvement of representatives of foreign
governments in payoffs, has put these friendly-to-us governments
in a very painful situation. The opposition, and particularly
the Communists, will naturally make great use of it. We are
trying to impose a code of ethics on the foreign countries
while the payoffs of the business world at home represent
billions of dollars. We should first try to clean our own
house, including the business activities promulgated by the
Mafia in this country.

These proceedings will certainly be harmful to our
foreign trade and will be very beneficial to our competitors
abroad. Such a policy can only lead to strengthen the
Communist forces abroad in their goal for world domination.

The setbacks the United States suffered around the world
and the fruits of them reaped by the Soviet Union were so
important that Breshnev, in spite of all his failures in the
economic and particularly in the agriculture field, was elected

- 4 -

for another five-year term as secretary of the party. He
succeeded not to suffer the same fate as his predecessor
for similar internal failures.

Lenin's prediction: "the capitalists will dig their own graves and we will hang them on the rope - they themselves shall supply us," starts to have sense and doesn't look purely illusionary any more.

Was it really necessary and advantageous to the country to
pay such a high price due to the Watergate episode?

The main beneficiaries of this scandal were the two obscure
reporters from the "Washington Post" who first won the Pulitzer Prize
for their "discovery" of the break-in and now are exploiting
the sad incident in order to cash in millions of dollars for
themselves by publishing their book and producing a film full of
distortions and dirty slanders.

All this is happening at a moment when "The New York Times,"
in its editorial by William Safire, dated March 29th, is declaring
that there now is evidence that the Democratic National Committee
itself knew about the forthcoming Watergate break-in six weeks
in advance!!

The other main beneficiaries are the liberal senators
heading the investigation committees. They were thus able to
acquire for themselves a lot of publicity, which became very handy
in attracting the liberal and radical votes of the country in order
to aid their individual candidacies for the White House.

The avalanche of world Communism continues to roll, covering
new countries one after another. They never change their goal of

- 5 -

world domination and are sticking to Lenin's principle that the end justifies the means. In countries where they are unable to grab the power by force of arms, the Communist Parties are using all methods available to undermine the position of the governments in power and to harm the stability of the countries by instigating political strikes, subversive activity and forceful propaganda mostly financed by their Mecca - Moscow. They are changing their tactics depending upon the political and economic situation at a given moment in one or another country.

The failure of the Portuguese Communists to succeed in taking over the government by force was rather a disappointing episode for their European colleagues. It might have made them think about the necessity of changing their modus operandi for the future.

The French Communist Party surely has also in mind the student rebellion in Paris in 1968 which frightened the French people and led to the election of an impressive majority of the Gaullist Party in the existing parliament.

The Italian and the French Communist Parties have substantially changed their tactics and are now coming out with a "new look." They are declaring themselves as believers in democracy, free elections, and patriotism. They are going so far in their new approach as to declare that the Marxist Communist basic theory of dictatorship of the working masses is the wrong one.

The French Communist Party recently allowed itself to intervene on behalf of the Communist Russian physicist, Mr. Plyusch, who was arrested and then interned in a mental

- 6 -

institution for charges of slandering the Soviet State.
They even allowed themselves to openly criticize the
Soviets for this atrocity.

The Italian Party goes even farther in
demonstrating changes in their policy. They state their
intentions are to vote for Italy's remaining in NATO, in case
they become a part of a new coalition government in the future.

All these tactics are being used to attract more
people into the party, particularly the liberal intelli-
gentsia. They try, in this way, to calm their fears
against the party's imitation of the Russian-style Communism.

However, after all these declarations of their good
intentions and changes in their policy, the leaders of
both these Communist parties recently proceeded to Moscow
to be present at the 25th Congress of the Communist Party.
They have joined the resolution of the Congress urging
the continuation of a vigorous struggle of world Communism
for further "liberations". By "accident", they have
omitted mentioning in their resolution the liberation of
Czechoslovakia from the Russian occupational army.

The leaders of the French Party, at the same time,
are expressing their dissatisfaction with Brezhnev's
detente policy and are urging him to utilize this favor-
able moment for a more vigorous promotion of the Communist
cause around the world.

When one compares these tactics with those applied
by the Soviet Union, Comminern and Comminform in the past,

- 7 -

tactics which never stopped vacillating, one can hardly
believe the "new look" of the French and the Italian
Communist Parties. How can one believe in the sincerity
of their declarations, when for more than five decades
they were following the Soviet Party line and have
accepted all their deeds, including the slaughter of
millions of people along with their comrades in the Polit-
bureau? The French Communist Party even accepted the Soviet-
Ribbentrop Pact which enabled the Nazis to attack and overrun
their own country.

Unfortunately, we are now approaching the most
dangerous moment of the forthcoming Communist penetration
into the future governments of Europe, with Italy being the
first ripe candidate for it. The continuing deterioration
of the economical, financial and political situations
there have naturally strengthened the position of the
Communist Party enormously. They have shown impressive gains
in local elections in Italy, and have succeeded in installing
members of their party as mayors of many large towns. In
new general elections, which may have to take place in the very
near future, the Communist votes may outnumber those of the
Christian Democrats and thereby become the largest party in
Italy. That will undoubtedly lead to a new government with
their unavoidable participation and become the first Trojan
Horse in NATO. Once they have succeeded in entering into a
coalition government, they certainly will try to secure one or
both of the most important positions - the Minister of War or

- 8 -

the Minister of the Interior. This will enable them in the
future to increase the pressure for their policy. Their present
desire is to start with a coalition government in which all other
democratic parties participate. They hope, in this way, to
eliminate the opposition. By stopping political strikes and their
subversive activity, they might then be able to show improvement
in the economic and political situation of the country. That
would naturally serve as a tempting example for other European
countries, particularly for France. It would surely be a great
help to the Communist Party for the future parliamentary elections
and for the eventual establishment of a front populaire government
there.

As time goes by, they could easily change their tactics of
collaboration with the Socialist Parties, and the honeymoon may
come to an end. Being firmly implanted in the governments, they
will then look for all possible means to impose their ideas in
furthering their Communist cause.

Unfortunately, that is not the only danger the free world is
facing. The possibility of a change in the present Soviet-Chinese
relationship cannot be excluded. We should not take for granted
that this belligerent situation which exists between them will
remain a permanent one under any and all circumstances. Things may
change, particularly when Chairman Mao is gone. The Chinese Revolu-
lution is full of puzzles and subject to unexpected and dramatic
events.

We were the witnesses of such surprises during the time of
the so-called cultural revolution, as well as the recent events,

- 9 -

whereby, in a few days' time, China had gone through a political
event of major dimensions. The Deputy Prime Minister, Teng-Haiao-
ping, who after Chou's death was installed as head of the govern-
ment and was believed to be Mr. Chou's personal choice as his
successor, was suddenly stripped of all his government and Party
posts. Hua-Juo-Peng, until early this year an obscure official,
was at once appointed Prime Minister and First Deputy Chairman of
the Communist Party. That made him a natural potential successor
to Mao Tse Tung himself. All this happened after a few thousand
Chinese people who vigorously protested against Chou's successor,
assembled in Peking to stage a rare demonstration. It is hard to
believe that these demonstrations were of a spontaneous nature,
organized without the knowledge of some high officials and without
Chairman Mao's approval. This expression of "public opinion" was
necessary to create a favorable atmosphere for getting rid of Chou's
successor and installing the new man chosen by Chairman Mao.

It might look rather strange that the only man who was treated
to a meeting with Hua was President Nixon during a visit to the
Forbidden City. Neither President Ford nor Kissinger had ever met
him nor had they ever exchanged a word with him. The timing of the
meeting between the man who first opened the door to China and the
man who shortly was to become the head of the government seems to
have been synchronized in expectation of the changes soon to take
place.

It is quite understandable that Chairman Mao wanted to give
his potential successor the opportunity to meet Mr. Nixon, whom he

-10-

considers to be a statesman of great international vision with
profound understanding of the United States/Chinese ties. Hua
certainly used this occasion to express the Chinese misgivings
about the fragile state of our relationship with them and about
the unfinished business since the first Nixon visit. They had
undoubtedly expected the formal diplomatic recognition of Commu-
nist rule in China, substantial increase in trade and technology,
and military assistance to follow the opening of our relationship
with China that President Nixon and Kissinger pioneered with such
enthusiasm in 1972.

It goes without saying that they worry about the deterioration
of our standing around the world since the Watergate affair and
particularly about our ability to check the build-up of Soviet
power and Moscow's expanding influence in such areas of the world
as Africa, etc..

Mr. Hua surely wanted to know Nixon's opinion concerning the
possibility of a change taking place in the United States' foreign
policy in the near future. He wanted to appraise for himself whether
China could count on the United States to once again become more
vigorous and more forceful in dealing with the outside world. The
reason for the invitation extended to Nixon by the leaders of China
was surely not due to "pure love" or appreciation for his friend-
ship. Such feelings are foreign to Communist leaders.

The purpose was certainly not only to exchange views with him
and to get his opinions, but mainly to use him as a messenger for
delivery of their doubts, desires and expectations to our adminis-
tration. All of that must have been incorporated in the famous

- 11 -

60-page memorandum delivered to the White House by Nixon (via a second-rate State Department employee!) upon his return from China.

The United States should hurry to strengthen its relationship with China and secure our connections before a possible struggle among successors of Mao can take place. We should not take for granted that the Chinese will wait for ever under any and all circumstances until we make up our minds and start to act in the right direction. One cannot be sure that the Chinese have no other options left. They have surprised the world many times in the past with drastic changes which took place overnight. Should they lose faith in our intentions toward them and our capability of checking the Soviet successes, they may one day change their approach towards their Red neighbor. They may find a modus vivendi with them and return to a mutual collaboration.

One can not and should not totally exclude such a possibility. Nothing is impossible: It could have already happened once in the past when General Lin-Pio (the potential successor of Mao) organized an army plot to assassinate the Chairman with the intention of totally changing the Chinese policy. Upon the plot's failure, he chose a Russian satellite for political asylum and was killed in his escape flight to Soviet Mongolia. Did not the drastic and unexpected fluctuations between Tito and Russis-- from love to hatred and then back to friendship and collaboration-- represent another striking example of Communist vacillation?

The years wasted on the Watergate affair and then by Ford's inability (due to the obstacles imposed by the new Congress)

- 12 -

to implement and continue our former foreign policy was certainly
very damaging. It resulted in a loss of faith by our friends in
the attitude of our government and the capability to fulfill
its obligations. At the same time it encouraged our adversaries
to get bolder and to use every loophole for advancing their cause.
All that becomes particularly evident and harmful to our foreign
policy during the election year in which we now find ourselves.

We should stop quarreling among ourselves and stop playing
around with our foreign policy for election purposes. We have
to hurry to do everything possible to regain the faith of our
friends and the respect of our adversaries. We cannot afford to
continue to postpone urgent and important decisions to be made and
implemented by our government, especially in our relationship with
China. Such postponement can lead the free world to very painful
consequences.

The western European leaders are in a state of gloom in their
belief that the United States is retrenching in world affairs.
They feel that, while the might of the Soviet Union is growing,
the United States is leaving a vacuum which they alone, under pre-
vailing circumstances, are unable to fill. The European leaders
recognize their own inability to act together, which feeling is
increasing by the absence of America from the world scene in this
election year.

To save the future of the free world, we and our western allies,
as well as Japan, have to make all necessary sacrifices to obtain
a mutual economic, financial and military policy. That will also
be beneficial to our relationship with China and help to avoid a
possible flirtation with Russia.

- 13 -

MAX M. FISHER

2210 FISHER BUILDING
DETROIT, MICHIGAN 48202

January 5, 1977

Dear Henry,

My congratulations to you on this wonderful occasion -- a tribute
by the Presidents Conference. Unfortunately, a long planned
trip to Central America prevents my being with you.

As I think back over the last eight years of our association, I am
reminded of the great contribution you have made to this country
as National Security Advisor to the President and as Secretary of
State.

All of us feel it a great honor in your having been selected for the highest post in government ever attained by an American of Jewish descent. However, most importantly, I have had the occasion to observe and spend time with you and marvel at your approach to world policy and making this world community of ours a better place to live.

You have made a tremendous start toward this great objective,
especially as we find the world relatively peaceful at the present
time. I needn't comment on what you have accomplished in
relationship with Russia, China and many other areas of the
world, because history will record this.

But I especially want to talk about what you have done as far as
the American Jewish community and Israel is concerned. I must
mention that, as Secretary of State, you created an openness to
the Jewish community, which they have never had since Israel
was established. Though there have been differences of opinion,
one must say that the hours you spent with the leadership of the
Jewish community was precedent-setting and indicated your
willingness and desire to accept input, which we never had before.

I firmly believe that your feelings of sensitivity to Israel has had
a great deal to do with strengthening the bonds between Israel
and America, even though there have been times of tension and
unhappiness. Above all, when one looks at it, the relationships
are stronger, and you had a great part to play in it in the last
eight years.

- 2 -

There is no question that the Middle East settlements have brought about a tranquility which never existed before, and you must have the credit for this great accomplishment. Upon this settlement rest our hopes for the future -- peace in the Middle East.

In conclusion, Henry, I particularly have found you to be a man with great sensitivity and a heart with understanding for the Jewish people. Over the period of these many years, I have grown to admire and respect you. I know you will be missed, but your influence will remain forever.

In my opinion, history will record you as the greatest Secretary of State we have ever had, and will also show that the Jewish people and Israel never had a better friend.

I regret very much not having the opportunity to say a few words when your parents are present, because I know what great pride they must have in what you have accomplished.

I hope I will have the opportunity to say a few words about you on another occasion, but in the meantime, please accept my very best wishes for the future.

November 5, 1975

Dear Roger:

Unfortunately, Dean Acheson was quite right. He understood that whoever sits in this chair labors under a perversion of Parkinson's law -- the number of crucial matters always expands to fill the available time.

You know how highly I have always valued your views, and I do want to make the time to talk over a number of things. I hope that as the holiday season approaches, the press of business here will wind down a bit. Although my staff generally tries to prevent my doing anything I will enjoy, you should get in touch with them to see if some mutually convenient time can be worked out.

It was good to see you again, even if only for a few moments.

Professor Roger Fisher,
Harvard Law School,
Cambridge, Massachusetts.

ROGER FISHER
HARVARD LAW SCHOOL
CAMBRIDGE, MASS. 02138
___
617 495.4615

October 8, 1975

The Honorable Henry Kissinger
Secretary of State
Department of State
Washington, D.C. 20520

Dear Henry,

As you suggested at the Senate Foreign Relations Committee yesterday, it is crazy that the only place you can meet your Harvard colleagues is in front of the Committee. Let me renew my request that you ask your secretary to fix a time -- presumably after you get back from China -- when you and I can talk. Here are three subjects for the agenda:

1. The Middle East: Ways to make continuing political progress toward a comprehensive settlement. Even work toward a comprehensive settlement must proceed in stages in which something is accomplished during the next four months, something during the six months thereafter, etc. I think the concept of a Geneva conference can be converted by this process into working groups, each of which is in-structed to prepare, on the assumption that other issues are resolved satisfactorily, non-binding draft clauses for possible inclusion in the comprehensive settlement. If over the weeks and months the working groups cannot agree on draft clauses they should prepare alternative drafts. Such a process would tend to convert problems into potential answers and make the issues more easily amenable to serious negotiation and compromise. ("We will accept your clause No. 134 on that problem if you will accept our clause No. 17B.") Enclosed is a copy of a letter I am sending Roy Atherton. I hope you will find time to read it.

2. On making the world a less dangerous place. It is currently my judgment that when you leave office through old age, death or retirement, the world is likely to be a more dangerous place than it was when you began. Your actions in dealing with problems, in trying to win a hand or to maintain and acquire chips for the next hand, have tended to make the game increasingly dangerous. If the Soviets should pick up a United States trawler off Vladivostok no one in the world would know whether this ought to be

The Honorable Henry Kissinger

October 8, 1975

Page two

treated as a minor incident in a period of détente or
as a Soviet challenge to our power and prestige. Whether
we responded by asking our commercial attaché to look
into the matter or by calling a nuclear alert would depend
upon the mood and private thinking of two people.

The goal of international peace is not a world in
which there are no disputes and problems but a world in
which disorder is dealt with in an orderly way. Criminal
law is important not because it prevents crime (which it
doesn't) but because it deals with crimes in a reasonable
and orderly fashion. We cannot hope to scare all nations,
whether Cambodia or the Soviet Union, into seeing things
our way. As we play the game of nations our objective is
gradually to improve that game so that incidents tend to be
kept small and dealt with by a reasonably impartial
process -- a process that is tolerable because it lets
each party "win" often enough to keep them in the game,
and in which the stakes in each unit of conflict are small
enough to make some losses acceptable.

As I mentioned to you two years ago when we spoke,
I think you (and Winston Lord and Monroe Leigh) will want
to find ways in which the United States can better keep
issues small and can respond in an increasingly orderly
and systematic way to the "violations" and disputes that
are bound to occur.

3. How do you propose to benefit from outside thinking?

At some point you are going to wish that you spent less
time on urgent matters and more time on important matters.
I know that Dean Acheson once said that when the choice is
between going to the bathroom or to the barber shop,
there is really no choice. But you should be able to do
better than that.

RF:it

ROGER FISHER

HARVARD LAW SCHOOL
CAMBRIDGE, MASS. 02138
---
617 495-4615

October 8, 1975

The Honorable Alfred Leroy Atherton
Assistant Secretary of State
Room 6242
Department of State
Washington, D.C. 20520

Dear Roy,

It was good to chat with you on the phone.

1. I am distressed at the developing thinking which implies a rigid distinction between "step by step" diplomacy and "an overall settlement." In working toward a comprehensive settlement we should identify intermediate steps which would get us there. We should identify what kind of step could be taken in the next three months, in the next six months, and in the next twelve months, that would move us toward the comprehensive peace which all seek. The steps need not be territorial disengagements on the Sinai -- in fact future steps of that kind seem most unlikely and not very constructive. The critical steps may be procedural ones of agreeing on some statements of principle, agreeing on terms of reference for a Geneva conference, agreeing on the participants, agreeing on the work to be done at the conference, etc.

2. It is extremely important in my judgment that United States officials listen to and talk with Palestinians reflecting the widest possible range of views including Palestinians who are active in the PLO. You do not have to "negotiate with the PLO" but you do have to talk with Palestinians. We should seek to influence them, not simply to wait for them to change their minds on their own. And establishing a variety of personal contacts now is likely to make effective communication possible months and years hence. Initial contacts will almost certainly be dominated by Palestinians letting off years of frustration. Let's start getting that out of the way.

3. The language of the assurance given the Israelis about our non-recognition of the PLO reflects one particular insensitivity to the Palestinian thinking. Many Palestinians who are prepared to commit themselves to live in peace with Israel are not prepared

October 8, 1975

Page two

to state that Israel's existence is "right." They accept the fact that the Jewish people have a right to exist and the existence of Israel as a fact of life. But just as many Americans would refuse to recognize the right of the Soviet government to exist in Lithuania or the right of Ian Smith's government to exist in Rhodesia, many Palestinians balk at the phraseology of accepting the right of the state of Israel. We should be prepared to talk with Palestinians about a final peace settlement in which they simply accept the existence of Israel and commit themselves to live in peace with Israel.

4. Palestinians see no reason for them to accept the existence and rights of the Israelis before the government of Israel, with equal formality, accepts their existence and their rights. Enclosed is a draft statement of the kind I would use as a basis for informal discussions with Israelis and with Palestinians. Incidentally, this draft has benefited from being discussed at a private meeting I had with an Israeli and a Palestinian who are more experienced and knowledgeable about the problem than I.

5. Another "next step" could be a set of parallel statements for Israel and the Syrian government. Enclosed is a draft which could be used to stimulate such a discussion. The question of the Golan settlements is difficult. Perhaps the most that the government of Israel could today promise would be not to preclude consideration of Syria's retaining sovereignty over the entire Golan.

6. Another possible next step, as I have previously suggested to you, would be to launch discussion of the terms of reference and the working procedure of a Geneva conference. Enclosed is a draft document reminding you of my thinking on that problem.

Frankly, Roy, I am somewhat at a loss as to how to proceed. I am reluctant to conclude that there is no way in which I can make a contribution to consideration of these questions. Yet month after month I find cables unacknowledged, letters unanswered, phone calls unreturned and offers rejected. If

DRAFT - RF

October 8, 1975

PARALLEL STATEMENTS

The Government of Syria has no intention to destroy the state of Israel or to inflict harm on the Israeli people. The Syrian Government is willing to allow a reasonable time within which to work out adequate arrangements for the mutual security of Syria and Israel. Once the Golan area has been effectively restored to Syrian sovereignty and once justice has been agreed upon with representatives of the Palestinian people, which justice shall be consistent with the continued existence of the State of Israel, Syria will formally and fully recognize the state of Israel, will respect its sovereignty, and will commit itself to live in peace with Israel.

The Government of Israel does not claim sovereignty over any part of the Golan beyond the borders of June 4, 1967. Israel's interest is not in sovereignty over the Golan but in security and peace. Once Syria formally and fully recognizes the state of Israel, and once adequate security arrangements have been worked out to the satisfaction of both countries, Israel will agree to the return of the Golan area to Syrian civil jurisdiction and administration.

DRAFT - RF

October 8, 1975

The Palestine Liberation Organization and the Government of Israel agree to meet in Geneva with representatives of other governments concerned at such time as shall be designated by the Co-Chairmen of the Geneva Conference and to seek in good faith a final peaceful settlement of the Middle East conflict that will involve:

- the assured existence of the state of Israel,

- the assured existence along side Israel of a Palestinian state,

- agreed borders between the two,

- measures to establish mutual confidence and security, and

- measures regulating the return or settlement of Palestinians in Israel and of Jews in the Palestinian state.

DRAFT - RF

October 8, 1975

PRE-CONFERENCE NEGOTIATIONS
(On the Draft Invitation)

To maximize the chance that the forthcoming Geneva Conference on the Middle East will succeed, a draft of invitation is being circulated by the USSR and the US as Co-Chairmen of the Conference, to the Governments of Egypt, Israel, Jordan and Syria for their comments and suggestions. The Co-Chairmen do not consider it necessary to achieve unanimous agreement on all points before issuing invitations, but would like to achieve a substantial area of agreement and would like the text of the invitations to have the benefit of the constructive suggestions of participants. In the light of suggestions received, it may well prove desirable to circulate revised drafts for further comment before issuing the final invitation.

DRAFT TEXT

1. The Geneva Conference on the Middle East will reconvene at 10:30 a.m. on ______ to seek a comprehensive settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict.

2. In the first instance, and until the Co-chairmen decide otherwise, the Conference will direct its efforts to the area of potential agreement that in the judgment of the Co-Chairmen holds the greatest promise. By attending the Conference, participants agree to seek in good faith a settlement that includes:

(a) full implementation of Security Council Resolution 242 and 338;

(b) provisions for the assured existence of the State of Israel within fixed and agreed borders;

(c) provisions for the assured existence of an Arab Palestinian state or entity in Palestine within fixed and agreed borders (which shall have such relationship with Jordan as it and Jordan shall jointly decide); and

(d) provisions for full peace, an end to all armed struggles, mutual acceptance recognition, practical measures to enhance mutual confidence and security, and such other measures as may be necessary or desirable to secure peace with justice among Israel and its Arab neighbors.

3. In addition to the Co-Chairmen, the Governments of Egypt, Israel, Jordan and Syria and the Palestine Liberation Organization are invited to participate in the Conference. As the Conference proceeds, the Co-Chairmen, at the request of any participant, will seek agreement on the question of the desirability of inviting additional participants. The Conference will meet, and will continue to meet, whether or not all participants attend or are able to attend all sessions.

-2-

4. The Conference will function through a number of Working Groups which shall operate concurrently. The Co-Chairmen will provide a presiding officer for each working group who shall have authority to decide matters of procedure, subject to the supervisory authority of the Co-Chairmen. Additional parties beyond those here designated as members of a Working Group may be added upon their request with the consent of the Co-Chairmen, who may also establish additional Working Groups if their need becomes apparent.

5. The task of each Working Group shall be to prepare draft clauses to be submitted to the Conference in Plenary Session, for possible inclusion in a comprehensive agreement. The preparation of any draft clause is without official commitment to its final acceptance by any party, but each clause shall be prepared on the assumption that it would probably be acceptable as a compromise if all other problems are resolved in an acceptable manner. Where a Working Group cannot agree on a compromise clause, alternative clauses shall be prepared, it being expected that the final negotiators will not attempt to draft new clauses but will rather accept whichever draft is the more reasonable and fair to all parties. Each Working Group shall produce at least one clause designed to resolve each problem within the scope of its work.

6. The Conference shall have the following Working Groups:

Group One: Steering Committee (all parties)

Group Two: Syrian-Israeli Security (covering disengagement, withdrawal, borders, mutual security, and related matters) (Syria, Israel)

Group Three: Egyptian-Israeli Security (covering disengagement, withdrawal, borders, mutual security and related matters) (Egypt, Israel)

Group Four: Palestinian-Israeli Questions (covering all Palestinian-Israeli questions not dealt with by other groups) (Israel, PLO, Jordan)

Group Five: Jerusalem (all questions) (Israel, Jordan, PLO)

Group Six: Cross-Settlement (all questions of Arabs settling in Israel and of Israelis or non-Israeli Jews settling in Arab lands) (Israel, PLO, Jordan, Syria, Egypt)

Group Seven: Financial Claims and Cross-Claims (Israel, PLO, Jordan, Syria and Egypt)

Group Eight: Gulf of Aqaba and Suez Canal (the regimes and arrangements for these waterways) (Israel, Jordan, Egypt) (with the consent of other participants, the Government of Saudi Arabia will be invited to have a participant on this working group)

Group Nine: Jordan River Valley (Water rights and development) (Israel, PLO, Jordan).

RECEIVED

-8 MAY 1975 13 39

O
SECSTATE WSH
WU WSH
TLXA 035 WAG 002 (0738) (2-007629E 128)PD 05/08/75 0737
ICS IPMMTZZ CSP
4134944109 TDMT PITTSFIELD MA 11 05-08 0737A EST
PMS HENRY KISSINGER
DEPT OF STATE
WASHINGTON DC
HENRY TODAY IS THE 30TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE LIBERATION OF DACHAU
HERB FISHMAN
928A DT
EDT
*
SECSTATE WSH