THE WASHINGTON POST,

Clayton Fritchey

# 'The Public Owes a Lot to Leaks'

Archibald Cox, who overnight became a revered martyr when the President fired him as the Watergate Special Prosecutor, is the latest to join the swelling chorus of those deploring “leaks” in Washington. But Cox should be the last man to complain. Without leaks, he would not be a national hero today.

Had there been no leaks about Watergate, there would have been no criminal investigation; and had there been no investigation, there would have been no Archibald Cox as Lord High Prosecutor. As Leon Jaworski's predecessor, Cox achieved both dismissal and immortality by demanding documents that Mr. Nixon refused to turn over.

Now, however, Cox, who has been away from the Washington scene for some time, seems to have forgotten the constructive, indeed indispensable, role that leaks have consistently played in unraveling the greatest scandal in the country's history.

Nobody should know better than Cox that so-called leaks are an inevitable part of the Washington scene. As the first special prosecutor, Cox, a former solicitor general of the United States, conducted himself impeccably and imposed the same conscientious standards on his large staff.

Yet, as the White House complained, there were some leaks even from his office. The biggest leak of all, in fact, came from Cox himself who, to his credit, was the first to acknowledge it. He privately told Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Sen. Philip Hart (D-Mich.) that former Attorney General Richard Kleindienst had secretly confessed to misleading a Senate committee about his role in the ITT anti-trust case.

But, as is usually the case with leaks, no real harm was done, for the information came out anyway (as it had to) when Kleindienst later pleaded guilty to not telling the truth about his orders from President Nixon.

It is generally assumed (but not proved) that the present leaks about Secretary of State Henry Kissinger's involvement in White House wiretaps originated either in the House Judiciary Committee headed by Rep. Peter Rodino (D-N.J.) or in Jaworski's operation. In fairness to Rodino and Jaworski, however, it should be noted that, like Cox, they have conscientiously tried to maintain the integrity of their operations. But they both have large staffs, and Rodino has a committee with 38 members who are privy to secret information. In the circumstances, as every practical politician in Washington knows, leaks are inevitable.

Cox was far wide of the mark in alleging that the leaks and stories about Dr. Kissinger are a throwback to the "heyday" of McCarthyism. The complaint against Sen. Joe McCarthy was not that he used leaks but that he invented false charges against others, along with twisting and maliciously distorting such tips as came his way. That is a long way from a responsible press publishing important leaks after first making sure they are accurate and reliable.

When Sen. Hugh Scott (R-Pa.), the Minority Leader of the Senate, also condemned the recent Kissinger news stories as McCarthyism, Sen. Lowell Weicker (R-Conn.) took sharp issue, saying, "The press has every right to ask questions. Everybody is sitting here saying they believe in freedom of the press, but . . . There is no 'but' to the First Amendment." And he added:

"I think I understand what McCarthyism is, and it seems to me that equating dissent or the asking of questions with disloyalty and treason runs far closer to McCarthyism" than what Scott had in mind.

Some of the officials making the greatest noise about leaks are themselves among Washington's prominent sieves. That includes Sen. Scott, Sen. Barry Goldwater (R-Ariz.), Sen. Ström Thurmond (R-S.C.) and Vice President Gerald Ford, who says the nameless leakers are trying to "undercut" both Mr. Nixon and Dr. Kissinger.

The biggest show of indignation, however, comes from the White House, which itself is by all odds the leakiest institution in Washington. The President's men are experts at it. After they got through leaking against former Vice President Spiro Agnew, he was a terminal case.

When the White House is the victim of leaking, though, it is equally adept at staging what humorist Russell Baker calls its well-rehearsed "shame-on-the-leakers!" act. As he says, the aim of that routine "is to change the subject so that everybody will stop thinking about the main plot line and start worrying about the evils of journalism."

It is not hard to see why the Nixon apologists are so worked up on the subject, for it is leaks that, in addition to Watergate, exposed the secret illegal bombing of Cambodia, the eye-opening Pentagon Papers, the hidden "tilting" against India, the My Lai massacres, the falsifying of Air Force records, the collusion with ITT and the multibillion-dollar overruns on military contracts. The fact is, the public owes a lot to leaks.

© 1974, Los Angeles Times

Acclaim, But Not Everyone Believes He Has Been Perfect

NEW YORK TIMES 6/16/74

# The Kissinger Stewardship

By LESLIE H. GELB

WASHINGTON—Last week Secretary of State Kissinger shed a tear and the world wept. Behind the weeping lies an assumption magnified by the positive attention Mr. Kissinger has received from the press—that he is to American foreign policy as oxygen is to life. While it is certainly true that few of Mr. Kissinger's critics would like to see him resign, it is equally true that he has responsible critics.

But at the same time it is important to state that Mr. Kissinger's supporters well outnumber his critics. One supporter, of course, is President Nixon. While rumors abound about differences between the two men, they are known to agree on the substance of American foreign policy. It is also apparent that most Senators, even those who disagree on policy, endorse the Secretary's integrity. Last week, after Mr. Kissinger threatened to resign, the Senate by a solid majority passed a resolution expressing high regard for him.

Mr. Kissinger has recently added the ruby of a Syrian-Israeli troop disengagement to his crown of jewels. But there are those on the left, right and center of the political spectrum who see some thorns in that crown as well. What follows is an assessment by his critics of Mr. Kissinger's performance as a diplomat.

*East-West relations.* Mr. Kissinger is credited with forging détente with Russia and China out of the debris of the cold war. Centrist critics do not buy this.

They contend that Peking and Moscow were seeking détente with Washington as a counter to their own intramural disputes. Mr. Kissinger's contribution was to see the change and seize the opportunity.

The strategic arms limitation agreements of 1972 constitute the centerpiece of Soviet-American relations. The treaty limiting defensive missile systems was generally acclaimed, but the agreement on freezing offensive missiles has been criticized by both left and right. The right thinks that the agreement went too far in giving Moscow a commanding advantage in numbers and explosive power of missiles and left Washington with a waning technological advantage. The left believes it did not go far enough and merely stimulated a new nuclear arms race in

missiles with multiple warheads. The left also notes that defense spending in general on both sides is rising.

Improved relations with Peking is a clear plus. But critics on the left point to the lack of tangible changes in America's role in Asia. Close to 200,000 American troops remain in that part of the world.

In sum, the Kissinger version of détente has been long on political benefits and general principles and short on hard settlements that lowered defense spending or established joint efforts to help others.

*West-West relations.* Critics on the center and right have often accused Mr. Kissinger of alternately ignoring and imperiling relations with Western Europe and Japan. The main charge is that Mr. Kissinger has paid more attention to promoting détente than showing up weakened and vital relations with allies.

Mr. Kissinger professed support for West European unity. Yet, when these Europeans sought a measure of unity through consultations that excluded Washington, Mr. Kissinger blasted them publicly for seeking a common identity in opposition to the United States.

The Kissinger “shocks” to Japan are notorious. Without consulting Tokyo, the Secretary opened ties with Peking and made key monetary decisions that deeply affected Japanese-American economic relations. These were not good examples for an ally to set. Tokyo’s confidence in Washington was severely undermined.

*The Middle East and Vietnam.* The Egyptian-Israeli and Syrian-Israeli troop separation accords are acknowledged as masterful. They are generally seen as the result of Mr. Kissinger's brilliance at combining timing, momentum and fairness.

Critics on the left fault Mr. Kissinger for not bringing about an end to American involvement in Vietnam sooner. They particularly condemn the military brutality in the Christmas air raids in 1972 following Mr. Kissinger's declaration in late October that "peace is at hand." They point to the fact that the agreement after the Christmas bombing differed only inconsequentially from the accord before the bombing. And unlike the Middle East ceasefires, this one never even got started.

*Human rights, international economics, food and energy.* These are Mr. Kissinger's weakest areas as far as critics on the center and left are concerned.

Here, the Kissinger era is compared with the Metternichian era of the first half of the nineteenth century. Prince Metternich, Palmerston, Talleyrand and other giants of diplomacy made brilliant efforts to hold eighteenth century Europe together against the revolutionary forces of the nineteenth century—nationalism, persistent famine, the growth of cities in the industrial revolution and the unrepresented millions who lived in them.

The deals and alliances they made were designed to suppress these forces and keep each other in power, but in 1848 and then in 1914, Europe exploded in revolution and change. The diplomacy had been proved irrelevant to secular trends and human needs. The peace was between governments, based on balanced "permanent interests," not a peace felt by the people based on social justice.

Mr. Kissinger, too, has focused his diplomacy on political-military matters at the expense of the international economic system, and the Biafras, Bangladeshes, human rights issues in nations like Chile and Greece, and the worldwide problem of hunger. They require sustained attention and laborious leadership both within the United States Government and with other nations. Mr. Kissinger's efforts in these areas have been limited for the most part to giving speeches.

*Institutionalizing diplomacy and restoring honesty at home.* When Mr. Kissinger became Secretary of State last fall, he made a number of promises about restoring confidence and credibility on the homefront. His record is seen as mixed.

Mr. Kissinger has acknowledged that the bureaucracy will remain long after he leaves the scene. Therefore, he pledged to make the professional diplomatist and soldier privy to sensitive secrets and to help them understand the structure he said he was creating. As of this time, his circle of intimates remains very small, and State Department morale better but poor.

He has made important strides in building a new consensus for American foreign policy and in re-establishing confidence between Congress and the Executive branch. But even here, some critics believe he has done so by at once being more candid and more devious than previous Secretaries. The feeling is that he tells more and conceals more.

As one Washington wag put it: "It's the same old thing. We say give us treaties, and Kissinger gives us executive agreements. We say no military advisers in Cambodia, and Kissinger says we only have weapons delivery teams there. "It's still government by Roget's Thesaurus."

## Italy

Italy's case seemed the most urgent. The country's economic problems followed the recent humiliation of Premier Mariano Rumor's Christian Democratic party when Italian voters decisively rejected its plans to repeal a three-year-old divorce law.

Some observers suggested that if the divorce vote had gone differently, the Socialist party, the main partner in Premier Rumor's coalition government, would have gone along with the regime's measures to cut public spending and to curb credit. But instead, viewing the divorce decision as discrediting the Christian Democrats, the Socialists refused to agree to the Government's plans to counteract the 20 per cent inflation rate and a balance of payments deficit now predicted to exceed $8.5-billion this year.

So, after just 100 days in office, Mr. Rumor resigned, then, after three days, came back.

His task was eased somewhat by a decision of the finance ministers of the main industrialized nations meeting in Washington. They agreed to a French suggestion that countries be allowed to revalue their gold reserves from the official price to one in line with current market quotations.

The Bank of Italy is holding more than 2,500 tons of gold, worth $3.5-billion at the official price of $42.22 an ounce but worth more than $14-billion at the present free-market rate. An official in Washington said: "Italy can now use her gold in security for a loan, and loans can be worked out on a bilateral basis."

Internal inflation and labor troubles had already weakened Italy's once booming economy when the oil price rises of last fall made a bad situation desperate. Oil imports cost Italy $4-billion last year; this year the bill could top $10-billion.

## France

But Italy was not alone in her oil payment crisis. France, which had been expecting a modest surplus in her balance of payments before the oil crisis, now expects a $6.5-billion deficit as she too struggles to meet a

money from the rich nations.

The World Bank had recommended the third choice, suggesting the $1.4-billion figure. "Without aid," the World Bank said, "the Government of India will not be able to surmount present difficulties and to maintain any momentum of economic development."

After hearing the Indian Government's rationale for the nuclear test—it was strictly a peaceful experiment—the 13 nations making up the aid consortium decided theirs was not the forum to debate atomic pros and cons and voted to give the assistance. Britain will give $200-million, West Germany $125-million, the United States $75-million,

## Vote in Saxony Encourages Bonn

By emerging with a narrow victory from its first major test, a state election in Lower Saxony, the new West German Government of Chancellor Helmut Schmidt now seems better able to survive continuing pressure from the opposition on the federal level.

In last week's vote, Mr. Schmidt's Social Democrats got about 44 per cent of the vote, down 2 per cent from the last election in 1970. But their coalition partners, the Free Democrats won about 7 per cent of the vote, up 2.5 per cent. The conservative opposition Christian Democrats got 48.3 per cent.

Before Chancellor Willy Brandt resigned over a spy scandal on May 6, it had been widely predicted that the Government would lose heavily in Lower Saxony. Both Mr. Brandt and Mr. Schmidt campaigned energetically.

Had the opposition won a majority in Lower Saxony, there could have been important repercussions in the Bundesrat, the upper house of Parliament, composed of state representatives. A Christian Democrat victory would have cost the Schmidt coalition its majority on several committees, with the resultant threat that its legislation could have been blocked.

By TERENCE SMITH

JERUSALEM—The photograph that dominated the front pages of most Israeli newspapers last Thursday showed a jubilant Richard Nixon and Anwar el-Sadat riding into Cairo at the head of a triumphal motorcade. In the background, easily readable even in the fuzzy wirephoto, was a handlettered banner reading: "Remember the Palestinians."

Israel can hardly forget them. Another bloody reminder came that same morning when a quartet of Palestinian commandos attacked a kibbutz near the Lebanese border. Three women in the kibbutz died and a man was wounded before the guerrillas were surrounded by the settlers and killed in a 30-minute gunfight.

The casualties were small compared with the massacres at Kiryat Shmona and Maalot, which took 44 Israeli lives, but the incident underscores the centrality of the Palestinian problem in any Middle East settlement. It is the crucial issue that must be resolved if peace is to be attained.

Increasingly, the solution that is being put forward is the creation of an independent Palestinian state. More and more people on all sides of the dispute are coming to speak of it as, finally, inevitable. The question seems sure to be raised eventually at the Middle East peace conference in Geneva and it has been in the background, if not the center, of President Nixon's discussions on his current tour of five Middle Eastern nations.

But how realistic is the concept of an independent Palestinian state? What are the real chances of such a state coming into being and surviving? Which problems would it solve and which would it create?

The general assumption, when such a state is discussed, is that it would be located on the West Bank of the Jordan, perhaps linked by a corridor of some kind to Gaza. Roughly one million Palestinian Arabs live in those areas now, about half of them registered refugees who fled 26 years ago from the territory that is now Israel.

If an independent Palestinian entity were ever formed, this resident population presumably would be joined by some of the estimated two million Palestinians now living in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria and other Arab countries. There is no way of estimating how many would actually move to the new state, however, since many have managed to establish themselves elsewhere.

Politically, an independent Palestinian state would have to overcome enormous difficulties. Both Israel and Jordan oppose it, each for their own reasons. The militant factions within the Palestinian guerrilla movement still reject it as a sell-out of their state goal of recovering all of Palestine, including what is now Israel. The more moderate elements, however, including Yasir Arafat, recently endorsed the establishment of a "National Palestinian Au-

Life in a Pal

FROM KING FEATURES SYNDICATE, 235 EAST 45TH ST., NEW YORK, N.Y. 10017

FOR RELEASE SATURDAY, JUNE 22 or SUNDAY, JUNE 23, 1974

HART: Probes deeper into the Secretary of State's threat to resign.

KISSINGER

BY JEFFREY HART

Henry Kissinger's highly emotional "resignation" press conference in Salzburg, Austria, disconcerted his admirers here, who praised his achievements, advised him to cool it, and hoped that he would get back to his duties. There may be a good deal more to that press conference, however, than meets the eye.

First of all, this may be the time to observe that Kissinger is not quite the insouciant practitioner of realpolitik that his public image suggests. During the recent Arab-Israeli conflict, for example, provoked by the reluctance of our NATO allies to provide facilities for the trans-shipment of materiel to Israel, Kissinger publicly blew his stack. He not only tongue-lashed the British and the West Germans, but went on to observe that Europe had not really had a legitimate government since World War I. That was quite a statement for a historian to make, and it would certainly have surprised Winston Churchill, Konrad Adenauer, Clement Attlee, Charles De Gaulle, and numerous other worthies. The reasons for the depth of Kissinger's emotional response to this situation remain mysterious.

## Natural Conclusion

Turning to Kissinger's Salzburg performance, one cannot but suspect that a good deal more than the wire-tapping controversy is involved here, and that Kissinger may have been deeply involved from the beginning in controversial White House security measures.

Last summer, the New York Times Sunday Magazine published a lengthy and surprisingly objective narrative account of Watergate developments to that point. Consider this paragraph on various responses to the Pentagon Papers disclosure: "The President's early reaction to the Papers' publication was remarkably relaxed. He told Republican Congressional leaders... that... it was far more likely to embarrass former President Johnson and his aides than anybody in the Nixon Administration... But... a contrary attitude was developing among key White House advisers, especially in the office of Henry Kissinger — who feared his secret negotiations with the Chinese and North Vietnamese would be imperiled by the doubt of these governments that the United States could be counted on to negotiate secretly and keep confidences with other nations."

We now know that the creation of the famous "Plumbers" unit in the White House was directly connected with the anxiety over leaks, an anxiety about which Kissinger himself has repeatedly testified. Indeed, concern over those leaks may have been supremely justified.

Kissinger-style diplomacy from Peking to Damascus is 19th century and European in character. It depends on secrecy, nuance, and the gradual building of mutual confidence. Leaks can be devastating.

The structure of the original Plumbers group is also revealing. John Ehrlichman was in over-all command, but just under him were Egil Krogh and David Young. Young was a top aide to Henry Kissinger.

(MORE)

BY JEFFREY HART

xx Kissinger.

Initial Purpose

The original Watergate coverup, it is now clear, had its roots in the desire to conceal the Plumbers
operation. And in that light, the President's current extremely protective attitude toward John
Ehrlichman's White House papers takes on a new significance.

Indeed, what President would not wish to protect an aide like Kissinger? — probably the most effective Secretary of State in American history, under whose auspices the entire balance of power in the Eastern Mediterranean has now shifted in a way favorable to the U.S. and who has, among other things, brought about the liquidation of the entire Soviet position in Egypt.

Judging by Congressional reaction to his resignation threat, Kissinger is going to survive, even if he did
tell a fib or two to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Distributed by King Features Syndicate

(NC)

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- i -

FOREIGN RADIO AND PRESS REACTION TO
PRESIDENT NIXON'S MIDDLE EAST VISIT

SUMMARY

NONCOMMUNIST WORLD

Egyptian comment, stressing the change in the U.S. attitude toward the Arabs as a result of the October war, placed great emphasis on the "legitimate rights" of the Palestinian people and took satisfaction in the reference to Palestinian "interests" in the joint statement on the visit. Egyptian comment on Israeli reaction to the U.S.-Egyptian agreement on nuclear energy decried "Zionist" attempts to thwart the improvement of U.S.-Arab relations, and Egyptian Foreign Minister Fahmi called for Israel to sign the nonproliferation treaty, as Cairo has done, with the warning that if Israel were to conduct an atomic test Egypt would do the same. After the President's visit to Israel, Cairo press comment cautioned that unlimited U.S. supply of arms to Israel was no longer justified and held Washington responsible for curbing Israel's "expansionist" ambitions.

Saudi Arabia's King Faysal and Jordan's King Husayn expressed appreciation of the President's visit, both making clear their preoccupation with the problems of the Palestinians and of Jerusalem. Syria, maintaining a low-key approach to the Presidential tour, was the only Arab host not to broadcast the text of the President's remarks. President al-Asad, like the other Arab leaders, placed emphasis on the Palestinian "struggle."

Israeli media, giving the President's tour wide publicity, displayed ambivalence, both welcoming the visit and expressing concern that improved U.S.-Arab relations not develop at the expense of American-Israeli ties. The announcement on U.S.-Egyptian cooperation in nuclear energy prompted wide reaction in Israel, with Foreign Minister Alon first offering assurances to the Israeli public but later stating that concern had been expressed to the United States and expressing displeasure that Israel was not informed in advance.

Other noncommunist world reaction to the visit was cautious about the practical results, and in many quarters apprehensive about the long-term hazards introduced through the U.S. agreement to provide both Egypt and Israel with nuclear power aid. West European media stressed the trip's positive implications for Watergate, and emphasized the unresolved Palestinian issue and the impact of the Middle East visits upon the President's imminent Moscow summit visit.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- ii -

Among Asian noncommunist countries, Japan's media provided the most extensive reportage and comment on the trip, seeing a "breakthrough" in U.S. relations with the Arabs but pointing up concern over the Palestine question and expressing dismay over the spread of nuclear technology to the area. Australian official and press comment gave special attention to the nuclear issue, criticizing President Nixon for increasing the hazard by the new agreements. Limited available African comment also laid stress on the nuclear issue. Available Latin American reaction was generally favorable, but limited in volume.

## COMMUNIST WORLD

Moscow media gave brief, factual reportage on the President's trip, with TASS and the central press providing fuller, if selective, coverage of some speeches in Cairo and Damascus and of statements concluding the visits to Egypt and Israel. Scanty comment has been confined primarily to PRAVDA's weekly international reviews and Arabic-language talks on the "unofficial" Radio Peace and Progress. The sparse coverage of the visit, together with oblique indications of concern, suggest Soviet indecision as to how to handle the tour. The emerging approach seems to be one of accommodation to the idea of a new U.S. relationship with the Arabs, while seeking to credit the Soviet Union for new directions in American policy through Moscow's pursuit of detente.

Moscow at the same time has pointed out that there has been no lessening of U.S. support for Israel, and that the Arabs do not want the new Arab-American relationship to replace their "traditional" ties with the Soviet Union. Soviet comment has also stressed the benefits of detente in connection with Middle East developments, portraying a joint U.S.-Soviet role in containing the October fighting, convening the Geneva peace conference, and achieving the disengagement agreements.

Moscow's East European allies generally saw no basic change in U.S. "imperialist" aims in the Middle East, but viewed the trip as reflecting greater U.S. awareness of Arab power in the area. Limited comment saw in Secretary Kissinger's Salzburg press conference threat to resign a reaction to attacks by U.S. opponents of detente.

Asian communist reportage and reaction to the President's trip was limited and generally low key. Peking confined its coverage to factual NCNA reports focusing on the Egypt and Syria visits, and has

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- iii -

not yet acknowledged the U.S. pledges of nuclear power aid to Egypt and Israel. Peking comment prior to the visit saw in it evidence of U.S. strength vis-a-vis Moscow prior to the scheduled Moscow summit visit. Vietnamese communist media provided very sparse coverage stressing alleged U.S. duplicity and giving play to Palestinian statements of defiance. North Korean and Mongolian People's Republic media ignored the visits.

Cuban communist reaction, predictably harsh, stressed the themes that Watergate and U.S. imperialist ambitions in the Middle East were behind the trip and expressed doubt that the Egyptian welcome for the President was genuine.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 1 -

# I. THE MIDDLE EAST

## HOST COUNTRIES

**EGYPT** Before President Nixon's arrival in Egypt and throughout his stay in the Middle East, Egyptian media and officials expressed optimism about the visit and welcomed it. The President's activities in Egypt were given blanket media coverage, from Cairo radio's live relay of his arrival on 12 June to the live relay of his departure for Saudi Arabia on the 14th. The speeches exchanged between Nixon and as-Sadat were broadcast live, with President Nixon's remarks in English followed by a translation into Arabic. The speeches were repeated in Arabic in subsequent newscasts. The visits by President Nixon to various historic points also received wide coverage.

A theme common to both official and media reaction was that the U.S. stand toward the Arabs "has changed considerably since the October war." A Cairo radio news analysis on 12 June said: "This visit reflects the extent of the change that has taken place in U.S. diplomacy toward the Middle East crisis after the October war."

An AL-AKHBAR editorial on the 12th, as cited by Cairo radio, said that the masses will welcome not only Nixon, but also as-Sadat, since he was "able to change the U.S. Government's policy."

Citing Egyptian officials' comments on the visit, the MIDDLE EAST NEWS AGENCY (MENA) on 12 June said that First Deputy Prime Minister Dr. 'Abd al-'Aziz Hijazi described Nixon's visit to Egypt "as a sign of appreciation for the Arabs," and quoted Foreign Minister Isma'il Fahmi as saying that the visit is "the direct outcome of the October war." On the 13th MENA reported that Egyptian papers featured the "great official and popular welcome accorded to the first U.S. President to visit Egypt" and highlighted the speeches exchanged between Presidents as-Sadat and Nixon. Reviewing the Cairo press, MENA said that AL-AHRAM concluded that Nixon's visit was "an opportunity for translating the U.S. President's appreciation of President as-Sadat into definite commitments to remove the causes of tension in the area and to achieve the goal of a just peace."

AL-AKHBAR was quoted as saying that "peace is the fulcrum of President Nixon's visit to Egypt" and the Middle East.

Egyptian statements and comment were careful to assert the emphasis Cairo places on the "legitimate rights" of the Palestinian people, with President as-Sadat declaring in one speech that the "political solution and respect for the national aspirations of the Palestinians are the essence of the whole problem." Cairo radio commentator

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 2 -

Muhammad Sharaf on 16 June noted that the clause in the U.S.-Egyptian statement referring to the "rights" of the Palestinian people "aroused significant world-wide interest" because in that clause the United States recognized "in an official document" that the Palestinians are entitled to "their full legitimate rights." Sharaf called this an important step toward "sound treatment" of the Palestinian cause. AL-AHRAM on the 17th, according to MENA, noted that in important Arab consultations President as-Sadat had been and would be holding after the President's visit, he explained that his talks with President Nixon were primarily aimed at securing a declaration of the U.S. stand toward the Palestinian issue as "a political problem and not a problem of refugees."

There has been extensive comment from Egyptian media and officials on Israeli and "U.S. Zionist" reaction to point three of the U.S.-Egyptian statement on "nuclear energy." Foreign Minister Fahmi in a 16 June press conference reported by MENA described a "rabid campaign" launched by "U.S. Zionist circles" over Egyptian-U.S. cooperation on the peaceful use of atomic energy as "an organized campaign" to combat the improvement in relations between the United States and Egypt and the Arab world. Fahmi asserted that the U.S. circles were basing their reaction on certain statements by Moshe Dayan, but said that Dayan had "concealed certain facts." The foreign minister added that the nuclear power facilities Israel already had, or was negotiating for with the United States, were the same as those in the U.S.-Egyptian pact. Fahmi declared that if Dayan and the Israeli officials did not want atomic weapons introduced in the area, they must sign the nonproliferation treaty. In an AL-AKHBAR interview reported by MENA on the 18th, Fahmi said that Egypt could produce an atomic explosion "if Israel introduces this horrible weapon into the area," and added that Egypt had signed the nonproliferation treaty "but it will not ratify the treaty unless Israel joins it."

Cairo press comment assessing the results of the visit has viewed it, as AL-AHRAM said on the 14th, as a new peace opportunity. AL-JUMHURIYAH on the 16th, according to Cairo radio's press review, said Egypt had achieved several important political gains for the Arab cause, such as an "official U.S. commitment" to the need for a just and permanent peace. AL-JUMHURIYAH explained that while the President "noticeably avoided" making any detailed U.S. commitment toward the Middle East issue in his speeches, this was due to the fact the present task was to establish common understanding and agree on general principles.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 3 -

In the wake of the President's visit to Israel, AL-AHRAM observed on the 17th that while the President realized that peace in the area "and the stability of oil exports" were dependent on an overall solution, such a solution must realize the Palestinians' "legitimate rights" and Israel "must recognize the reality of the Palestinian homeland." The United States, AL-AHRAM said, must now "prove that it can be independent of Israel" and give preference to what serves not only U.S. interests but the interests of peace in the area. In an article on the 18th, AL-AHRAM recalled the President's statement in Israel that peace, as well as fighting, required courage, but a courage of a different kind. If the United States was serious about the establishment of peace, then it was capable of giving Israel a lesson in the other kind of courage, AL-AHRAM said, adding that the unlimited supply of U.S. arms to Israel "is no longer justified," and the United States "becomes responsible" for ending Israel's "expansionist ambitions" in the area.

Some comment affirmed that Egypt's new friendship with the United
States would not develop at the expense of Cairo's relations with
Moscow. AKHBAR AL-YAWM chief editor Mustafa Amin was cited by MENA
on the 15th as declaring that "we will not buy U.S. friendship by
selling out Soviet friendship, but rather will simultaneously maintain
the friendship of the two superpowers." A Cairo Voice of the Arabs
commentary on the 12th welcomed the President's visit as evidence
of the "vital and constructive role" to be played by the United States,
but another Voice of the Arabs commentary the same day emphasized that
American-Egyptian realtions did not "shut the door" to "any other
international power." While praising the "practical outlook" of the
President and Secretary Kissinger and stressing Cairo's "confidence"
in their stands, the commentary pointed out that there would be no
friendship with one party "at the expense of another party."

SAUDI ARABIA
The Saudi radio provided extensive reportage on the President's trip throughout the area and particularly his stay in Jiddah, but there was no monitored comment on the visit. Riyadh radio on 14 June reported the banquet given by King Faysal and later broadcast recordings of the speeches exchanged by the king and President Nixon, whose speech was carried in English with passage-by-passage Arabic translation. Faysal in his speech declared that "the injustice and aggression inflicted on the Palestinian people is unprecedented in history." He expressed Saudi Arabia's faith that the United States would work for peace, adding that "we believe there will be no real and lasting peace in the area until Jerusalem is liberated and returned to Arab sovereignty, all the occupied Arab territories are liberated, and the Palestinian Arab people recover their right to their homeland and to determine their own fate."

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 4 -

Prior to the President's visit, the Saudi radio on 8 June had reported a statement by Minister of State for Foreign Affairs as-Saqqaf stressing the significance and usefulness of the visit, and on 15 June it carried an interview with the U.S. ambassador praising the "historic" trip. On 14 June, just before President Nixon's arrival, Riyadh radio carried the comments of Foreign Ministry Under Secretary ash-Shaykh Muhammad Ibrahim Mas'ud. Noting American preparedness "to change its policy toward the Arabs," Mas'ud said: "America realized that its interest lies here, and it therefore has opened a new era." He continued: "All that the Arabs hope is that the United States will stand by justice and right." On the President's visit to Saudi Arabia in particular, the under secretary said that it "confirms and crowns the new American policy."

SYRIA Syrian media maintained a low-key approach to President Nixon's Mideast tour. The radio carried reportage on the President's arrivals, departures and contacts in the Arab countries, but no mention of Nixon's stop in Israel was monitored from any Syrian source. On 14 June the IRAQI NEWS AGENCY reported that four "prominent members" of the Syrian Communist Party refused to participate in the reception for the President. The INA report was not carried by Syrian media.

During the Syrian leg of the President's tour, no live relays were monitored from Damascus radio. A radio report gave details of the arrival ceremonies for the "great guest" on the 15th and briefly reported the talks between the two presidents and departure of the "prominent guest" the following day. Damascus broadcast an announcer-read text of President Hafiz al-Asad's banquet speech on the 15th, in which al-Asad talked of the struggle of the Palestinian people who "have been displaced for 26 years." Al-Asad said that peace in the area was impossible "without a real and just solution to this cause." He told President Nixon: "We hope that your visit to the Syrian Arab Republic will constitute the beginning of a new era in relations between our two countries." The radio noted that President Nixon replied to al-Asad's speech, but gave no details. Later newscasts featured announcer-read quotations from the President's speech.

Damascus radio on the 16th carried an announcer-read text of a statement to the press by President al-Asad which said: "As we understand it, the agreement on the disengagement . . . constitutes a first step and an indivisible part of the just overall solution of the question--a solution which cannot exist without" Israel's

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 5 -

withdrawing from all occupied Arab land and the rights of the
Palestinians being secured. Al-Asad also announced the decision
to restore U.S.-Syrian diplomatic relations. Following the text
of al-Asad's statement, the radio carried a report on President
Nixon's remarks to the press. The Syrian news agency on 16 June
carried an apparent text, in Arabic, of Nixon's statement. In
reporting the departure ceremonies for the Nixon party on the
16th, Damascus radio did not mention the President's next stop,
Israel. On the 17th the radio reported the President's arrival
in Jordan and covered his activities there and his departure for
home on 18 June.

Damascus radio on the 17th briefly reported that the raising of
the U.S. flag over the U.S. embassy was "celebrated today" following
restoration of diplomatic relations. No press comment on the visit
was reviewed by Damascus radio, but MENA, in a Damascus dispatch on
the 15th, said the Damascus ATH-THAWRAH frontpaged photographs
of presidents Nixon and al-Asad and "devoted banner headlines" to the
visit.

JORDAN Amman radio carried in-depth reportage on all of President Nixon's stops in the Middle East. Both radio and press comment on the visit, although minimal, praised the Nixon visit and U.S. efforts for peace in the area. Amman radio quoted the Jordanian newspaper AR-RA'Y as saying on 10 June that the visit shows the "highest degrees" of American policy interest. The radio again quoted AR-RA'Y on the 12th as warning that the accusations against Dr. Kissinger concerning Watergate were a threat by "forces" trying to direct American foreign policy. On the 15th Amman reported AR-RA'Y's praise of the President's visit to Cairo and the joint statement issued there.

In an unattributed commentary on 16 June, Amman radio commended U.S. efforts to bring peace to the Middle East, but stressed that peace was impossible without Israeli withdrawal from occupied territories, "especially Jerusalem," and without Israeli acknowledgment of Arab rights. Another unattributed commentary carried by Amman radio on the 17th repeated praise of U.S. peace efforts and the necessity for Israeli withdrawal.

On 17 June Amman radio carried a live relay of President Nixon's arrival. The radio later carried a live relay of speeches exchanged between King Husayn and Nixon at a banquet; both men spoke in English, and there was no Arabic translation. Following the relay the radio returned to a studio-originated broadcast for an announcer-read Arabic text of Husayn's speech. Presumably no Arabic version of

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 6 -

the President's speech was then available; the following day
Amman broadcast an Arabic-language report of the Nixon speech,
and also carried the text of the joint statement issued on the
visit. The departure ceremony was relayed live over Amman radio,
including the speeches exchanged in English by the two heads of
state. Arabic-language reports on both speeches were carried on
later newscasts. After the President's departure, Amman radio
reported various social activities and tours attended by the
Presidential party on 18 June, including a military ceremony.

ISRAEL Israeli media featured voluminous reportage and comment on the Presidential visit to the Arab countries and similar treatment of his stay in Israel. All of Nixon's public speeches in Israel were carried live in English by Israeli radios, followed by a brief announcer-supplied summary in Hebrew. Hebrew texts of Nixon's speeches were carried on subsequent radio news-casts as well as in the Israeli press.

Comment on the trip was ambivalent, expressing both welcome and concern that improved U.S.-Arab relations not develop at the expense of Tel Aviv's ties with Washington. In Jerusalem radio's 10 June press review, HAZOFE was cited as looking forward to the forthcoming visit with "hope and trust," while SHE'ARIM called the visit part of the process in the "realization of establishing an American empire in the Middle East on the ruins of the British empire."
NASHA STRANA, HADASHOT ISRAEL and NOWINY KURRIER warned Israel to be careful that the U.S. rapprochement with the Arab states is not "at our expense." Commenting on the President's welcome in Egypt, DAVAR on the 13th, according to Jerusalem radio, saw a "political friendship" being formed between Washington and Cairo and hoped that it would not be "at the expense of the old friendship with Israel."

Jerusalem media indicated that among the top issues on the agenda for the President's talks in Israel would be further aid and the problems of Soviet and Syrian Jewry. Thus, a Jerusalem radio correspondent noted on the 12th that economic, rather than political issues, would dominate the talks. Likud leader Begin's request that the Knesset discuss Syrian and Soviet Jewry in connection with the forthcoming Presidential visit was reported in an English-language broadcast of Jerusalem's international service on the 11th. The radio carried a recorded interview with Foreign Minister Alon on Begin's request, in which Alon asserted that American efforts "to aid Syrian Jewry during the Presidential visit to Damascus would be facilitated" by the Golan disengagement agreement. A Jerusalem radio broadcast later that day quoted Alon as saying that the "special position" won by Nixon and Kissinger in Damascus would enable them to make "humanitarian demands" for the release of Syrian Jews.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 7 -

Jerusalem radio on 13 June featured an interview with Ambassador Dinitz on his arrival from Washington to prepare for Nixon's visit. Asked about the dangers for Israel from a U.S.-Arab friendship, Dinitz replied that, on the contrary, U.S.-Israeli relations should be strengthened by "furthering U.S. interests in the Middle East."

On 14 June Jerusalem radio carried a government statement "thanking" the United States for its traditional aid to the state of Israel. The statement concluded that the government "hopes that the Presidential tour will help the Middle East countries to overcome their hostility and aggressive tendencies."

Following the Cairo announcement of U.S.-Egyptian cooperation in the nuclear energy field, wide-scale and varied reaction was reported from Israel. Information Minister Aharon Yariv was quoted by Jerusalem radio on the 14th as confirming that Israel was also negotiating for U.S. help in that field. Yariv said that the U.S.-Egyptian agreement meant nothing more than "American aid to Egypt for the production of electricity from nuclear reactors."

Foreign Minister Alon commented on this subject in an interview carried by Jerusalem radio on 15 June. Asked if he was "worried" by the U.S.-Egyptian agreement, he said: "When the reference is to nuclear power stations and nuclear fuel . . . under agreed supervision, there is no danger in that." Alon's views were described as "irresponsible" and "liable to seriously harm Israel's security" by Knesset member Shemu'el Tamir, as reported by Jerusalem radio. "In the wake of the many repercussions" from the U.S.-Egyptian cooperation, Alon spoke again on Jerusalem radio on the 15th. He said that he was "neither pleased nor frightened" by the agreement, and added that even if it were only for peaceful reasons, "it is much too soon . . . there is as yet no economic justification." Alon also expressed displeasure that "we were not informed . . . in advance."

On the 16th Jerusalem radio reported a special meeting of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee with the foreign minister, precipitated by the committee's "concern over the U.S. agreement with Egypt." Jerusalem papers on 16 June, as reported by Jerusalem radio, welcomed Nixon to the area and hailed U.S. efforts for peace, but continued to convey concern over the U.S.-Egyptian pact.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 8 -

Jerusalem radio on the 16th gave live coverage of Nixon's arrival at Ben-Gurion airport, including President Katzir's welcoming speech in English and Nixon's reply. The radio also reported briefly on the initial U.S.-Israeli talks. Returning to live coverage, Jerusalem radio carried the two presidents' speeches, given in English, at a banquet in the Knesset.

Jerusalem radio on the 17th carried a report on Secretary Kissinger's press conference in Jerusalem, with further details provided on subsequent newscasts. Information Minister Yariv was quoted by Jerusalem radio on 17 June on his reaction to remarks by Kissinger. He repeated Israel's stand "not to negotiate" with the Palestine Liberation Organization and also said that a Palestinian state between Jordan and Israel "would endanger Israel."

A radio correspondent's report on the U.S.-Israeli statement on the visit was broadcast by Jerusalem radio on the 17th; the text of the statement was published the following day in the Hebrew-language papers DAVAR and HA'AREZ. The departure ceremonies on the 17th were covered live by Jerusalem radio.

In its review of the Israeli press for 17 June, the radio noted that "satisfaction" was voiced over the President's promises to "continue to stand by Israel," but that concern was growing over the U.S.-Egyptian agreement, about which Nixon said "not one word." Following the President's departure, Jerusalem radio on the 17th reported that the Likud and Mafdal factions submitted a no-confidence motion to the Knesset "because of statements" on the U.S.-Egyptian nuclear power agreement. The opposition parties said that while "experts believe there is a real danger. . . the government spokesmen have caused serious damage by their statements and affected the prospects for foiling the agreement."

Prime Minister Rabin held a press conference on the 17th, carried live by Jerusalem radio, in which he summed up Nixon's visit as having "symbolic" and "practical" significance. Rabin praised the visit on the grounds that it furthered U.S.-Israeli relations and the prospects for peace in the area. Jerusalem radio on 18 June quoted the Israeli press as summing up Nixon's Middle East visit "with mixed feelings." The radio noted that the papers drew attention to the U.S. promises of long-term "security and economic" aid, while voicing mounting concern over a possible "nuclear arms race in our region."

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 9 -

OTHER ARAB COMMENT

THE PALESTINIANS Reaction from some Palestinian factions, particularly as reported by Iraqi media, has been predictably hostile to the United States' Mideast policy and has made digs at the Arab regimes which received the President. Voice of Palestine programs using Baghdad and Algiers radio facilities expressed strong opposition to the visit, while the clandestine Voice of Palestine ignored the trip except for sparse reportage on major events, particularly references to the Palestinian issue. The Cairo Voice of Palestine on the 18th reported an "official Palestinian source" as warning that the "Zionist enemy's security pledge by Nixon will not be achieved," a statement also reported by the IRAQI NEWS AGENCY (INA). In its only other monitored commentary on the visit, the Cairo Voice of Palestine on the 19th criticized King Husayn, calling his reliance on President Nixon "futile."

A Baghdad Voice of Palestine commentary on 12 June proclaimed that "the ugly face of imperialism will not be beautified by as-Sadat's praise," and a day later another commentary declared that the President's motives for his visit were to show "certain parties and states of the world that the Middle East is within the U.S. sphere of influence" and "to cover up for the Watergate scandal."

An Algiers Voice of Palestine commentary on the 17th defined the American idea of peace in the Middle East as ultimately based on "Arab recognition of the Zionist entity in Palestine." The commentary called for establishment of a Palestinian state on "all occupied Palestinian soil" and warned that U.S. efforts to impose its concept of peace as well as the Zionist concept of peace would "lay the foundations for war" instead of peace. The radio had noted on 14 June that the Egyptian-U.S. statement had said that "a just and lasting peace in the Middle East must take into account the interests of the Palestinian Arab people." An Algiers Voice of Palestine commentary on the 19th called the Israeli raids on Lebanon that day the result of a "strategy which was endorsed by President Nixon during his visit to occupied Palestine." Noting that all Arab fronts had "ceased fighting" the enemy, the commentary said the Palestine front now has to "shoulder with its people and revolutions the consequences of the disengagement agreements."

INA on 14 June cited an official of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine--the General Command--as criticizing at a press conference in Baghdad the "21-gun salutes fired in Arab capitals for those who supplied the U.S. planes that three weeks ago exterminated an-Nabatiyah camp and other camps of our people."

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 10 -

Another official of this fedayeen organization was reported by INA the same day as asserting that the Nixon visit was "evidence of the level to which political affairs have deteriorated," and warning against a dangerous "imperialist, reactionary and Zionist plot" aimed at expanding U.S. influence in the Arab area.

Tripoli radio on 15 June broadcast a joint statement on the visit to Libya by Palestine Liberation Organization chairman Yasir 'Arafat; it declared that the Arab nation would not be deceived by "attempts at misleading and plotting by U.S. imperialist circles trying to liquidate the Palestine question and exterminate and obliterate the Palestinian personality." The Libyan and Palestinian revolutions, the statement said, would resist all "capitulationist solutions," and al-Qadhdhafi and 'Arafat in the statement pledged to "escalate the Palestinian armed struggle."

**IRAQ, LIBYA** Reaction to the President's visit by Iraqi, Libyan and South Yemeni media was characteristically and predictably negative, critical, and severe, both in regard to the President and the United States as well as those Arab regimes who welcomed the "archimperialist." Iraqi and Libyan media provided daily reportage and comment. The Baghdad newspaper **ATH-THAWRAH**, organ of the ruling Socialist Arab Ba'th Party, described the welcome of the "colonialist executioner" by the "compromising Arab regimes" as disgraceful. It maintained that true Arabs would always deal with "Nixon and his Zionist gang" with steadfastness and struggle, rather than diplomacy and submission. An article by the newspaper's "Observer" contended that "the leader of U.S. imperialism was coming to our homeland like a conqueror." Baghdad radio's Arab affairs editor said the President was not a man of peace, and that the Iraqi people were angered by his presence in the Middle East. The radio often cited the security measures taken by the host governments as a true indication of the feelings of the Arab people. The Iraqi Communist Party newspaper TARIQ ASH-SHA'B argued that the visit was part of a plan to divert the progressive regimes from their anti-imperialist efforts and drive a wedge between them and the Soviet Union and the other socialist states.

Libyan media also adopted a defiant position, castigating the President and questioning his intentions. Tripoli radio commented that the President was posing as a peacemaker to guarantee the existence of Israel and increase U.S. influence in the Middle East. Some of the strongest language appeared in the newspaper AL-FAJR AS-JADID, whose views were disseminated by the Libyan news agency. The paper implied that there was no place in the Arab world for the President except in a grave or an inferno. Arab "kowtowing before the American god of war,"

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 11 -

the paper said, was "a defeat in the worst form." The Libyan news agency's political commentator described the U.S. offer of nuclear aid to Egypt as a trick designed to justify giving Israel nuclear weapons.

South Yemen's Aden radio echoed many of the same critical themes. The radio denounced the visit as a reflection of U.S. interest in maintaining influence in the Arabian Peninsula and the Persian Gulf area. Saudi leaders were accused of briefing the President on arrangements to topple the regime in the PDRY. The Aden newspaper 14 OCTOBER suggested that the United States was reformulating its policy in the area to enable Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Iran "to create a new balance against the liberation and democratic movements of the people in the area."

### LEBANON
Major and favorable interest in the Nixon visit was expressed by Lebanese public spokesmen. Several high officials, including the acting prime minister and the defense minister, indicated they were hopeful that the visit would contribute to the peaceful resolution of the Middle East problem. Lebanese Minister of State Shadir stated that the visit reflected a historic change in U.S. policy to insure the establishment of a balance between the influence of the United States and the Soviet Union on the one hand, and the Arab states and Israel on the other. Lebanon's diverse newspapers reflected a broad spectrum of criticism and praise. Those newspapers with close ties to the more radical Middle East groups tended to assess the visit in highly critical terms, while other papers ranged from great enthusiasm to mild criticism. The latter papers were generally in agreement that the ultimate results of the trip would be beneficial. Unusually sharp criticism was contained in pro-Iraqi and pro-Libyan papers, and in AN-NIDA, the Lebanese Communist Party paper.

### MAGHREB, OTHER STATES
Monitored Moroccan media, while closely covering the President's trip, did not comment extensively. The newspaper LE MATIN published several increasingly enthusiastic articles praising Nixon's political courage. The anti-Nixon and anti-Kissinger campaign directed by the powerful "Zionist lobby," LE MATIN wrote, has not prevented Nixon from pursuing his new Middle East policy. In a similar fashion, a Moroccan press agency commentary paid tribute to Nixon's "courageous stand" in charting a new foreign policy line in the face of "increasing Zionist control" in the affairs of state. At the same time, however, it emphasized the necessity for the Arabs to preserve relations with the Soviet Union on a "firm basis." The agency's press review on 18 June said the President's trip remained the main international affairs topic in the papers, and noted that papers had pointed out that the President had "issued a disguised warning to the Arab countries about the Palestinian guerrillas" during his visit to Israel.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 12 -

Tunisian reaction to the President's trip was generally favorable, while stressing the need to settle the Palestinian problem. The Destourian Party's French-language paper L'ACTION emphasized the "exceptional importance" of the tour, asserting that the U.S. attitude toward the problem of the Palestinians "has definitely changed." The paper saw this as the first time in over a quarter of a century that there had been hope of a "just and lasting peace," but it emphasized the "enormous difficulties" ahead. The party's Arabic-language paper AL-'AMAL called U.S. recognition of the legitimate rights of the Palestinians "decisive," but noted that this recognition was "not lacking in ambiguities." Regardless of the importance of President Nixon's contacts on his visit, the paper said, an "appreciable" number of "fundamental" problems have been left unresolved.

Algeria's response to the trip was not as vitriolic as the reaction of Arab radicals but the limited available comment was infused with strong reservations about U.S. policy and critical evaluations of U.S. intentions. Algiers radio commented that President Nixon's avoidance of the Palestinian question meant that no progress had been made on the basic reason for discord. The French-language newspaper of the ruling National Liberation Front, EL-MOUDJAHID, published news agency reports but provided little comment. The NFL's Arabic-language newspaper, ASH-SHA'B, published an editorial asserting that the President's claims about bringing peace constituted a "veil" concealing U.S. aims to "dominate and exploit" the region. The paper scorned U.S. claims of neutrality and contended that U.S. words were in glaring contradiction to deeds.

Monitored Sudanese, United Arab Emirates, and Yemeni Arab Republic media confined their coverage to reportage on the President's visit.

Iranian, Greek, Turkish, and Cypriot media carried extensive reportage on the visit, but the only available comment here was monitored from Teheran radio and clandestine stations broadcasting to the area. Teheran hailed the U.S.-Egyptian rapprochement and dwelt at length on the wisdom of Egypt's recent policy changes.

The clandestine Radio Iran Courier carried a brief talk saying that Nixon's main objective was "to establish a stronghold in the Arab world." The radio also noted that "reactionary sources" have been lauding the Nixon visit in an effort to "hide" the Soviet Union's work for peace in the region. The Turkish-language clandestine station, Our Radio, described Nixon's visit as a "so-called display of peace" and noted that while Nixon talks about peace with the Arabs he continues to give financial support to the Israeli Government and has not given up his "bloody plans against the peoples of the Middle East."

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 13 -

## II. OTHER NONCOMMUNIST COUNTRIES

### WEST EUROPE

The news media of France, Great Britain and West Germany provided extensive reportage and comment on the President's trip, some comment viewing the trip as a breakthrough toward peace and other comment seeing it as an escape from the troubles of Watergate, but most agreeing that only time will tell if anything tangible has been achieved.

**FRANCE** French media reaction was cautious but generally optimistic in assessing the positive achievements of the President's trip, while presenting overall favorable impressions of the popular and official welcomes accorded the President throughout his visits. A 19 June editorial in LE MONDE stated that in all the countries the President visited he received a welcome that was "either cordial or triumphant, depending on the situation." It attributed the Arab and Israeli leaders' decision to put aside their misgivings about aspects of U.S. policy toward their respective opponents to their awareness of "the material means" at U.S. disposal. The communist L'HUMANITE introduced a sour note by quoting a Libyan paper which asked why the President was being feted when he had been "primarily responsible" for denying the Arabs victory over Israel. Israel's muted "detachment and certain cynicism" in the face of the enthusiastic Arab welcome was dictated, according to LE FIGARO on 17 June, by a desire to "play along" with the President as "better preparation" for his USSR trip.

The Palestinian question dominated much of the French comment. LE FIGARO asked if President Nixon was "not coerced by as-Sadat" into including in the U.S.-Egyptian statement a reference to "the Palestine people's legitimate interests." The same paper also noted that the communique with Jordan mentioned Resolution 338, whereas King Husayn had "constantly" referred to Resolution 242 in his banquet speech. L'HUMANITE wrote that King Faysal "appeared all the more vehement" in his demand for consideration of the Palestinians' national rights in light of his traditional position as "one of the most faithful U.S. allies." A Paris radio dispatch from Damascus on the 16th noted that al-Asad's statements to President Nixon did not stand on protocol in stressing that peace is not possible without a "just and real solution" to the Palestinian problem.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 14 -

Other Paris comment tended to view the President's trip in relation to its effect on Soviet attitudes. Paris radio correspondent Jean Claude Mangeot commented on 12 June, for instance, that the Soviets "were very interested" in the trip since, in "reopening its doors" to America, the Middle East "is confirming the leadership of the United States." And a radio commentary by Edouard Sablier on 13 June noted that by deciding on rapprochement with the United States, the Arabs were taking "a calculated risk" of "irritating their Soviet ally."

A striking feature of the French press coverage was that, after the first day, little if any reference was made to the domestic difficulties of President Nixon and Dr. Kissinger. Similarly, Paris radio did not stress the Watergate aspect to any great extent. Notable exceptions included a Michel Anfrol dispatch from Washington on 10 June which commented that the President had left for the Middle East "to forget his worries over the Watergate affair," and a report by radio commentator Edouard Sablier, who noted on the 13th that the Arab leaders "are perfectly aware of the good turn" they are doing the President and who emphasized as-Sadat's statement that Nixon's dismissal would be viewed in the Arab world as a "tragedy."

L'HUMANITE on 18 June expressed reservations about the lasting effects of the trip, stating that "the battle for a just peace in the Middle East will be far from over once the projectors of Mr Nixon's spectacular have been switched off." In a similar comment L'AURORE of 19 June, as reported by AFP, said that in the end, after all the "fanfare and spectacular ovations," no prospect of a "genuine solution" had become clear.

UNITED KINGDOM
After an initial flurry of editorial comment on Kissinger's Salzburg press conference, the British press relied heavily on prominently displayed reports from its own correspondents and REUTER dispatches in covering the President's trip. The TIMES reported extensively on the "rapturous welcome" in Egypt, declaring that the agreement signed there "emphasizes the strides made by Washington in the Middle East." Although the OBSERVER labeled the trip a "gaudy triumph," most papers expressed concern over the "problems and dangers ahead," particularly that of the Palestinians.

A highly favorable TIMES editorial of the 15th, though warning that the new U.S.-Arab relationship could be threatened by Israeli intransigence over the withdrawal issue, noted that the

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 15 -

Soviets "can hardly be expected to view Mr. Nixon's triumphal progress through the Middle East with unalloyed pleasure." The DAILY TELEGRAPH, traditionally the most pro-Nixon of all British papers, in an editorial on the 17th, claimed that through Kissinger's and Nixon's Middle East travels, the United States "has scored for herself and the West as a whole the first global success for many weary years." The same issue nevertheless prominently reported negative U.S. and world reaction to the trip, an example of which was supplied by its Damascus correspondent, who stated that objections to the trip "did not come entirely from pro-Russians. I was told some of Sadat's more sophisticated friends felt he was pinning too many hopes on an American President hopelessly weakened by Watergate."

WEST GERMANY
West German media comment as usual covered a broad spectrum, but highlighted the three themes of Watergate, the Palestinian issue, and the placing of nuclear reactors in the Middle East.

SUEDDEUTSCHE ZEITUNG, reviewed by the Cologne Deutschlandfunk, editorialized on 14 June that the foreign policy successes of the President stand in almost "fantastic contrast" to his "domestic calamities," and noted that Nixon wants to present his critics at home with a President "cheered abroad." Likewise, NEUES OSNABRUECKER ZEITUNG of 17 June, also reviewed by Deutschlandfunk, saw the man "plagued by Watergate worries" "revived" by millions of cheering Arabs. The Muenster WESTFAELISCHE NACHRICHTEN of 19 June, reviewed by the same radio, called the cheers greeting the President "balm" for him personally and an indication that a "Watergate-weakened" America can still play its part in world politics.

In contrast, the prestigious FRANKFURTER ALLGEMEINE ZEITUNG termed it "unfair" that the trip should be viewed by many, in light of Watergate, as a "possible relief" for the President on the "foreign affairs frontline." In a comment on 18 June, reported by Deutschlandfunk, the paper congratulated the "much-chided" Nixon for considerably mitigating the dangers of the Middle East "powderkeg" and concluded that he can be counted on in the future as well. Similarly, a Mainz radio commentary of the 18th said the President's trip had improved the "climate and sentiment" even if no "direct and concrete" steps toward peace had been taken. Earlier on the 5th, setting the stage for the visit, an editorial in the same Frankfurt paper had concluded that the United States now has "greater influence" than the USSR "on the Nile" and that the "American word today in nearly all of the Arab Orient wields more

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 16 -

weight than during the turbulent sixties." The editorial con-
cluded that "it is in the common interest of the Western world
that the leading Western power puts in a self-assertive appearance
in the Middle East."

Some comment cautioned against expecting too much from the trip. The Ludwigshafen RHEINPFALZ of 17 June, reviewed by Deutschlandfunk, noted that the "most difficult" problems have not yet been solved and pointed to the Palestinian question as capable of spoiling the Middle East situation. The Dortmund RUHR-NACHRICHTEN of the same date points to the Palestinian question and the problem of the Old City of Jerusalem as being "nearly insurmountable obstacles."
HANNOVERSCHE ALLGEMEINE ZEITUNG on the 13th, as reported by the same radio, noted that Nixon was a man who loved "grand words" and commented that if his "fine words," like those in Cairo calling his visit a "great historical turning point," are not followed by deeds, the Arabs' "disenchantment" will be all the greater. DIE WELT, in an editorial on the 18th, pointed to the President's acknowledgement of the legitimate interests of the Palestinians as a "concession" which the Arabs will insist on being fulfilled.

The 17 June Duesseldorf RHEINISCHE POST, in discussing the promise of U.S. nuclear aid to Egypt, is reported by Deutschlandfunk as questioning whether the moderate as-Sadat might not one day be replaced by a "hatemonger" like al-Qadhdhafi and speculating that Nixon had possibly left a "timebomb" on the Nile. SUEDDEUTSCHE ZEITUNG of 19 June accused the United States of setting an "ill-boding circle into motion" in an effort "to please all its Mideast customers," where MUENCHNER MERKUR wondered whether the United States would in the end receive what the Soviets received for their assistance--"a kick."

ITALY Although Italy's acute domestic problems tended to dominate the front pages and editorial columns of Italian newspapers during the trip, two major papers, Turin's LA STAMPA and Milan's CORRIERE DELLA SERA, published daily factual dispatches from correspondents on the trip. Both papers agreed with CORRIERE'S Ugo Stille that, regardless of the alleged domestic implications, the President's trip pursued largely positive aims "intended to symbolize and strengthen the turnabout" recently achieved in U.S.-Arab relations. A generally expressed view was that the trip had shown the United States to be "the real power in the Middle East."

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 17 -

Both papers agreed that the trip was a blow to Soviet influence in the Middle East, but they differed in assessing its impact. Igor Man asserted in LA STAMPA that the USSR was "not humiliated," where-- as CORRIERE commentator Sormani insisted that the trip was "a serious slap in the face for Moscow." Frescobaldi, in CORRIERE, took a reserved position, stating that the President's "journey of peace" had been "not a point of arrival but one of departure."

The communist newspaper L'UNITA expressed suspicion of the President's motives, declaring that the trip pursued the "obvious aim" of "strengthening the Presidential image" at home. Its unattributed dispatches also expressed doubt that the trip would contribute to a settlement in the Middle East, emphasizing particularly--as did noncommunist newspapers--the uncertainties remaining on the Palestinian issue.

AUSTRIA Most Austrian papers gave prominent coverage to all phases of the trip, particularly to his stay in Salzburg, but editorial comment was relatively scant. Noncommunist press assessments were cautiously optimistic that the trip would help stabilize the Middle East situation, whereas the communist press viewed the trip in stock terms as indicative of a change in U.S. policy toward the Arabs which was "enforced" by the powerful support given them by the USSR and the other socialist countries. Additionally, the Austrian media gave heavy play to Secretary of State Kissinger's Salzburg press conference in which he threatened to resign.

An editorial of the Socialist ARBEITER-ZEITUNG on 13 June, entitled "Uncle Sam in the Middle East," stressed the "heart-warming" reception in Egypt and added that it is a "small miracle" that "the United States has succeeded in being, or becoming, good friends with both sides in a grave conflict." It warned, however, that "Nixon's visit to the Middle East has aroused great, perhaps too great, hopes on both sides," and that "it will take great diplomatic skill to reduce these hopes to a reasonable level." This and several other papers stressed that the main question, the Palestinian problem, still remains to be solved.

An editorial in the independent DIE PRESSE on 15 June stressed the interrelationship between foreign and domestic policy and the negative influence of the President's "weakened domestic position" on U.S. foreign policy, observing that he "is attempting to defend himself against the hydra of the mass media and the consequences of the recklessness of his own staff with the aid of foreign policy." Another DIE PRESSE editorial on 20 June summed up the outcome of

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 18 -

the Middle East trip as a "mere down payment for peace," declaring that only Brezhnev's forthcoming visit to Arab capitals will give a more concrete indication as to what extent the superpowers have "coordinated" their Middle East endeavors and have perhaps mapped out their "spheres of influence."

A communist VOLKSSTIMME editorial on 12 June, entitled "What Does Nixon Want in the Middle East?," viewed the trip as an attempt by Nixon to outstrip his EC economic rivals in relations with the Arab countries, asserting that since the Arabs used oil as a political weapon a kind of race between the United States and the EC has started. In another editorial entitled "Not Nixon but the Arabs Have Been Successful," the communist VOLKSSTIMME on 20 June depicted Nixon's trip as a "symptom of America's yielding on the Middle East issue," "enforced" by the powerful support given to the Arabs by the USSR and the socialist countries.

OTHER COUNTRIES

Portuguese media expressed particular interest

in President Nixon's talks with General Spínola.

A Lusitania news agency report on 19 June described the meeting as "historic," and Deputy Prime Minister Sa Carniero in a statement over Lisbon radio on 19 June, commenting that the meeting had "exceeded all expectations," emphasized what he termed President Nixon's statements of "complete support for Portuguese policy and Portuguese positions."

Stockholm's conservative SVENSKA DAGBLADET, in a 12 June editorial, reflected the view of much of the Scandinavian press that Dr. Kissinger's Salzburg press conference threatened to "overshadow" the entire trip. Its coverage went further, however, than most of the Scandinavian newspapers, which on the whole restricted themselves to factual coverage based on press agency reports with only sparse comment. Reviewing the results of the trip in a 19 June editorial, SVENSKA DAGBLADET stated that the President would "not neglect to make the most of" the trip to consolidate his "domestic policy advantage" already gained from Dr. Kissinger's diplomacy, but that this "credit side" should not be regarded as "secure forever."

Finnish comment on the trip was light, but radio reports covered the President's activities throughout the trip. The 19 June KANSAN UUTISET, reviewed by Helsinki radio, called the trip a "positive turn" and a change toward detente, which it characterized as a policy "persistently aimed at" by the socialist countries headed by the Soviet Union. The paper criticized the "Western reactionary press" for trying to "belittle" the role played by the Soviet Union and said these "partial" though "important" steps toward peace had been possible only with the aid of the Soviet Union.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 19 -

ASIA AND AFRICA

JAPAN Japanese media, which carried extensive reportage on the trip, viewed it as a diplomatic success for the United States and the Arab nations. The United States was credited with achieving a breakthrough in strengthening relations with the Arabs, but presumed U.S. nationalistic interests in securing oil supplies, plus uncertainty over the Palestinians, were seen as causes for anxiety. The spread of nuclear technology in the Middle East also evoked comment and dismay. Suggestions that the trip was at least partially motivated by domestic considerations linked to Watergate were widely published.

Editorially, ASAHI said that an attempt to achieve a diplomatic success in the wake of Watergate served as a backdrop to current U.S. efforts in the Middle East but that "more fundamentally," Washington's basic aim was "to pursue its long-term national interest--that is, preventing the risks of a confrontation with the Soviet Union . . . and the danger of losing a stable source of oil supply." On 21 June the same paper concluded its editorial by saying, "With the date of the Geneva Mideast Peace Conference still undecided and the road to peace in the Middle East regarded as stretching endlessly, the fact that the word 'nuclear' has appeared in the first step taken toward that goal leaves us with a deep feeling of anxiety."

A 20 June YOMIURI editorial noting that enduring peace in the region was impossible without a settlement of the Palestinian problem said: "We have been impressed by the progress made so far . . . . However, a true and lasting peace has yet to be achieved." The JAPAN TIMES editorial of 19 June, encouraged by the frank exchange of ideas between the President and the Arab leaders, noted that "President Nixon will now be in a more advantageous position in his forthcoming meetings with Soviet Communist Party Chief Leonid Brezhnev. . . ."

A 20 June editorial in the Japan Communist Party paper AKAHATA criticized the trip as an effort by the United States to establish "a new alliance with the ruling groups representing national interests in Arab countries, thus dragging the latter into the world strategy of U.S. imperialism. Therefore the United States has made a 'step forward' toward the establishment of a new type of neocolonial rule in this area."

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 20 -

**REPUBLIC OF CHINA**
Taiwan media have carried extensive reportage on the President's journey but have offered little comment. Available editorial comment has portrayed the visit as strengthening the U.S. position in the Middle East at Soviet expense. A CENTRAL DAILY NEWS editorial of 10 June viewed the trip as giving President Nixon more "trump cards" to use in his forthcoming trip to Moscow, but predicted that despite current pressure on its position, the Soviet Union will remain in contention in the Middle East. The editorial also pointed out that the visit may "shore up" the President's "deteriorating" position on the domestic front. Taipei Domestic service promptly reported the U.S. announcement of proposed nuclear aid to Israel but avoided mention of nuclear aid in reporting U.S.-Egyptian agreements.

**SOUTH VIETNAM**
The South Vietnamese press gave President Nixon's trip generally light coverage, with the tenor of comment ranging from cynicism in the "opposition" press to cautious optimism in the "pro-government" papers; there was no monitored radio or television comment. The pro-government papers such as DAN CHU and QUAT CHONG viewed the President's trip as a diplomatic victory, boosting Nixon's prestige and providing some relief from the pressures of Watergate. The opposition press, exemplified by the papers DAI DAN TOC and DIEN TIN, dealt with the trip in cynical and deprecatory terms, claiming that it brought no new results and was aimed at reducing domestic criticism over Watergate. Comment in the independent papers HOA BINH and DONG PHUONG was generally skeptical. The latter observed in an article on the 17th that "President Nixon's trip 'toward world peace' . . . cannot end either in Cairo, Damascus, Tel Aviv or Moscow. Its 'last leg' should be in Indochina, if he is actually determined to create a generation of peace for the world."

**OTHER ASIAN COUNTRIES**
Strong comment by Australian officials and the press has centered on the U.S. offer to provide nuclear technology to Egypt and Israel. Noting the backdrop of recent nuclear tests by India, France and the PRC, comment has underlined Australia's preoccupation with nuclear proliferation and criticized President Nixon's actions as having further irritated the situation. According to a Melbourne radio report, Deputy Premier Cairns on 20 June criticized the President's decision as "most unfortunate" and predicted that it cannot have a helpful effect on Middle East peace. The governor of South Australia on 17 June expressed concern that Egypt might use the nuclear aid to construct a bomb.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 21 -

Sparse Indian and Pakistani comment has sidestepped the issue of U.S. nuclear aid to Israel and Egypt, while focusing on the visit as the climax of a remarkable turn of U.S. fortunes in the Middle East since the October 1973 war. A Delhi radio commentary on the 19th portrayed the United States as the chief beneficiary of the visit, claiming that little outward progress had been made on resolving fundamental issues dividing the Israelis and Arabs. It said that President Nixon was intent on avoiding contentious issues, hoping to strengthen Washington's position by means of economic and technical assistance, but added approvingly that Arab leaders had persisted in calling attention to the issue of Palestinian national rights. The commentary alluded to the implications of superpower rivalry in the visit, noting that Moscow had felt impelled recently to remind the Arabs of past Soviet support and of historical U.S. backing for Israel. The pro-Soviet PATRIOT on the 16th deplored the fact that Cairo seemed to be turning its back on the past era of Soviet aid and rejecting the heritage of the Nasir period, preferring to "hand over" Egypt's economy to "U.S. monopoly capital."

Karachi radio commentaries have taken pains to balance praise for U.S. Middle East achievements symbolized in the Nixon visit with a warning of Arab determination to achieve total liberation of their lands. A 16 June article expressed hope that President Nixon would use his influence to move Tel Aviv to a "more rational view of existing reality."

Limited Malaysian and Indonesian comment has similarly praised the U.S. achievements, while noting the need for further progress toward a resolution of contentious Arab-Israeli issues. Philippine and South Korean media have not been heard to comment on the visit.

### AFRICA
The President's trip to the Middle East has been fully reported by most monitored African radios, but few have originated comment. The major point of controversy in the sparse comment thus far revolves around the nuclear issue. Salisbury (Rhodesia) radio was notably outspoken on this issue, recalling the recent Indian test in observing: "How do you stop someone from making gunpowder when you have supplied the ingredients?" An 18 June Nigerian radio commentary also cited the nuclear agreement as creating a "more inflamable" world situation, but it hedged its position by stating that this "should not rule out the use of nuclear devices for peaceful purposes."

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 22 -

As the trip began, Brazzaville radio on 11 June carried an account from its Cairo correspondent hailing the visit for consolidating Washington's position in the Middle East and giving much credit to Egyptian President Sadat. The Ghanaian and Nigerian comment on the same day was less favorable. The Ghanaian state-owned DAILY GRAPHIC speculated that "indispensable oil" was the prime reason for the trip, and the Nigerian radio commentor stressed that the case of the Palestinians must still be resolved, "whatever trick is used to effect a cease-fire between Syria, Egypt, and Israel." Available Nigerian press comment on 16 June, following the President's enthusiastic welcome in Cairo, was more forthcoming. A column in the Benin SUNDAY OBSERVER noted that the "broad mass of Egyptians" seemed to accept the President's peaceful purposes and pointedly called on the Palestinians to join in the movement to shed "old intransigence." And the ENUGU RENAISSANCE WEEKLY stated that "in terms of world politics" President Nixon may have surpassed the achievements of any other president.

## LATIN AMERICA

Monitored Latin American media gave continuous coverage to the Presidential trip, though seldom featuring it as top news item of the day. Radio newscasts from Argentina, Brasil, Chile, Uruguay, Paraguay, Peru, Bolivia, and Central America reported most aspects of the trip on a regular basis, relying on foreign press agency reports. Newspapers treated the trip as frontpage news and featured foreign press agency reportage and radiophotos. The available sample of editorial opinion presented the trip in generally favorable, and sometimes glowing terms.

### ARGENTINA
Among Argentine newspapers reviewed, only the 19 June CLARIN and the 19 June LA OPINION carried commentary-type items. CLARIN'S editorial noted that President Nixon "could act with considerable freedom" on his trip because "he was not under pressure of worries over U.S. oil requirements and, in addition, he could bask in the fresh U.S. prestige in the region as a result of the spectacular success of his Secretary of State there." While the editorial complained of the neglect of the underdeveloped world in the commercial aspects of the trip, it concluded that the presidential journey "can be considered a positive step to the extent that it consolidates peace, a condition which will objectively spread development to all nations." The LA OPINION article concentrated on the "Palestinian problem" in relation to the trip and noted that the President "avoided a sharp definition of the problem" by "insisting that it must be solved 'stage-by-stage.'"

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 23 -

**BRAZIL**
JORNAL DO BRASIL, carried frontpage leads on the trip every day from 12 to 18 June. On 13, 14, 15 and 17 June the paper frontpaged radiophotos highlighting Nixon's stay in Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Israel. On 15 June the paper ran the text of the agreement between President Nixon and Sadat. JORNAL DO BRASIL'S reportage was taken from various news agencies. In general, the three aspects of the trip which received the greatest attention were Secretary of State Kissinger's press conference in Salzburg, the agreement to supply nuclear technology to Egypt and the President's talks with Portuguese President Spinola.

**MEXICO**
An editorial in NOVEDADES of Mexico City on 4 June linked the forthcoming visit to the Watergate scandal, noting that Nixon's foreign policy was "one of his most effective weapons" in terms of his prestige at home. However, NOVEDADES warned, the President's "struggle" should not be overemphasized. To do so would be to belittle the importance of these "highly meritorious" actions. The paper also saw a relationship to the forthcoming Moscow summit meeting and expressed the hope that both sides would make strides toward achieving a "a sound understanding" and true peaceful coexistence without the cold war and the tensions of the past.

**PANAMA**
An editorial in LA ESTRELLA DE PANAMA on 11 June also professed to see a relationship between the President's domestic troubles and the Middle East trip. Calling Nixon "capable and shrewd," the paper guessed that the President "might even survive" Watergate, saying he has taken advantage of the "favorable circumstances" in order to make the trip, a journey made possible in large measure by the successes of Dr. Kissinger. The paper expressed the hope that, as a result of "Nixon's wise decision" to go ahead with the visit, the results would benefit not only the Arab states and Israel, but also the international reputation of the United States and of the President.

The Panama City CRITICA carried a column at the end of the visit warning of the dangers inherent in the U.S. nuclear aid to both Cairo and Tel Aviv. It will be "extremely easy" for Israel, the paper wrote, to change that aid into an offensive nuclear capability, and since the Arabs are not as technically advanced as the Israelis, the Soviet Union "will not hesitate" to provide similar expertise to the Arab states. The paper blamed the United States for seemingly adopting a dual standard: one week criticizing India for testing a nuclear device; the next, providing Cairo and Tel Aviv with a powerful instrument which "undoubtedly" will end up in the military laboratories of both nations.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 24 -

## III. COMMUNIST COUNTRIES

### THE SOVIET UNION

Moscow media provided brief, straightforward reportage on the President's trip, with TASS and the central press offering correct, if selective, coverage of some speeches in Cairo and Damascus and of the statements concluding the visits to Egypt and Israel. Comment has been confined primarily to two successive weekly international reviews in PRAVDA and to Arabic-language commentaries on the "unofficial" Radio Peace and Progress. A dearth of Soviet coverage of U.S. policy statements on the Middle East just prior to the trip, together with the sparse comment on the visit and oblique indications of concern, suggest Soviet hesitancy as to how to handle the tour.

While Moscow earlier scoffed at Egyptian declarations of a change in Washington's Middle East policy, the evolving Soviet approach seems to suggest some accommodation to the idea of a changing U.S. relationship with the Arabs, while taking credit for new directions in American policy by virtue of Soviet influence through detente. Moscow nevertheless is at pains to point out that Washington's support for Israel has not lessened, and to stress that the Arabs themselves do not wish the new Arab-American relations to replace their "traditional" friendship with the Soviet Union.

As the President began his trip, the first intimation of Soviet concern came in Gromyko's Supreme Soviet pre-election speech in Minsk on 10 June. Referring to the "high" prestige of the USSR's foreign policy, Gromyko declared that no important international problems could be solved without Soviet participation and added that "it certainly cannot be solved to the detriment of the Soviet Union's interests."

At the same time, with the forthcoming Moscow summit in mind, Soviet commentators have gone out of their way to play up the benefits of detente. Relating the "new atmosphere" in U.S.-Soviet relations to the Middle East, Moscow has asserted that the relaxation of tension made it possible for the two powers to avoid a dangerous confrontation during the October war, to "take the initiative" leading to the convening of the Geneva conference, and to play an "important role" in the Sinai and Golan disengagement agreements. During the President's trip, meager Soviet comment on the Arab-Israeli issue--without mentioning the Presidential visit--complained of Western press "fabrications" regarding Arab-Soviet relations and portrayed the Soviet Union as a prime Middle East peacemaker.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 25 -

**COMMENT** The PRAVDA international review on 9 June, in Moscow's first observation on the visit, merely noted that a large part of the world press regarded the President's tour, and the possible resumption of U.S.-Syrian relations, as evidence of an American desire to normalize U.S.-Arab relations which had been "undermined" by U.S. support for the Israeli "aggressors." There was no further comment until PRAVDA's review the following week, when the paper noted on the 16th that the Arabs had rightly regarded the United States as "the accomplice of the Israeli aggressors," but that the new international climate provided an opportunity for a change in the nature of U.S.-Arab relations. Indirectly indicating Soviet misgivings over the implications of this change, PRAVDA ascribed to "cold war advocates" a desire to interpret the President's trip "in their own way and use it for a campaign aimed at undermining Arab-Soviet friendship."

PRAVDA displayed sensitivity over what it described as "rightwing press" assertions that U.S. policy would lead to elimination of the USSR's influence in the Middle East. Replying to "Western observers" who were displaying enthusiasm for "'Americanization' of the Middle East," PRAVDA recalled Secretary Kissinger's assurance in his 6 June news conference that the United States had neither the intention nor the capability to eliminate Soviet influence from the region. A foreign-language commentary by Rassadin on the 19th followed PRAVDA's lead in charging that "cold war" supporters tried to exploit the Presidential visit to widen the campaign against Arab-Soviet friendship.

Moscow's Radio Peace and Progress provided an example of initial Soviet uncertainty as to how to handle the trip. An RPP Arabic-language commentary on 10 June carefully avoided any mention of the President's visit in discussing what it called an upsurge of U.S. press interest in the Arab world, evidenced by visits to the area by a "big team of U.S. reporters." On the 17th the radio replayed PRAVDA's remarks of the previous day, and a commentary on the 18th pegged to the U.S.-Israeli statement saw the U.S. affirmation of readiness to provide Israel with weapons and "substantial" economic assistance as encouragement to Israeli occupation of Arab territory. The commentary acknowledged that "certain changes" had occurred in the United States' Mideast policy which gave the Arabs "an opportunity to alter their relations with America" but gave much credit for these changes to the Soviet Union. And in an Arabic-language commentary on the 19th, Radio Peace and Progress claimed that the "positive developments" in U.S.-Soviet relations had given the USSR the opportunity to "actively influence" the U.S. stand on the Middle East, although "despite this" it was evident that American assistance to Israel would continue.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 26 -

COVERAGE OF VISIT

In limited reports on the various speeches made during the trip, Moscow has tended to play up statements that coincide with its own public positions on the Middle East problem. Thus, an Arabic-language broadcast on the 14th cited Egyptian President as-Sadat as declaring that disengagement was only a step toward solving the issue on the basis of Security Council resolutions. Syrian President al-Asad was similarly quoted by TASS on the 16th as calling disengagement a first step toward a firm peace. The TASS account noted President Nixon's remark that the first steps already taken were only a beginning, and the task was now to advance step by step toward a just and lasting peace. TASS also cited the President as saying the United States understood Syria's concern over the Palestinian question.

In reporting the U.S.-Egyptian statement of principles, TASS on the 14th made no mention of the fact that the document called for a peace settlement that would take into account the "legitimate interests of all the peoples of the Middle East, including the Palestinian people." The account did note that the statement declared peace could only be attained through negotiations within the framework of the Geneva peace conference. TASS also reported that the United States and Egypt would begin negotiating an agreement on nuclear energy, and that a provisional agreement would be concluded this month on delivery of U.S. nuclear fuel to Egypt.

A 17 June TASS report on the U.S.-Israeli statement also noted that the two countries would sign an agreement on cooperation in nuclear energy and U.S. delivery of nuclear fuel to Israel, and that a temporary agreement on the sale of such fuel would be signed this month. The TASS account focused on the matter of aid, reporting that the President reaffirmed that military deliveries would be continued on a long-term basis and that the United States would give "substantial economic 'aid'" to cover Israel's expenses in maintaining its military potential.

TASS on the 16th reported without comment the announcement on the resumption of U.S.-Syrian relations. TASS reports on the U.S.-Israeli and U.S.-Jordanian statements noted the President's invitations to Israeli Prime Minister Rabin and King Husayn to visit the United States, but the invitation to President as-Sadat was not mentioned in TASS' report on the U.S.-Egyptian statement. Other than a two-sentence report on the President's arrival in Jiddah, the visit to Saudi Arabia was virtually ignored. The Radio Peace and Progress commentary on the 19th did cite the Lebanese Communist Party daily AN-NIDA' as reporting the President's statement that the United

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 27 -

States wanted Saudi Arabia "to be strong" and as pointing out that Washington was interested in strengthening "Saudi reaction" as the mainstay of U.S. policy in the region.

## EAST EUROPE

Scattered comment from Moscow's orthodox East European allies-- Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, East Germany, Hungary, and Poland--generally argued that President Nixon's tour signified no basic change in "imperialist" aims in the Middle East, but was undertaken because of "realistic" U.S. awareness of the Arabs' new influence stemming from their successes in the October war and the oil embargo. These countries' commentators also saw a connection between the trip and the President's Watergate-related difficulties at home, reiterating their standard charge that the President's critics are motivated mainly by opposition to detente. Such motives were blamed by Hungary, Poland, and Czechoslovakia for the attacks on Secretary Kissinger, in the wake of the Secretary's Salzburg press conference. The orthodox East European comment also duly included tributes to the Mideast role of the Soviet Union, under Brezhnev's leadership. The tour drew the largest reportorial coverage among East European radios in Hungarian and Czechoslovak media, including almost daily half-minute film clips on Prague TV.

A sizeable volume of Yugoslav comment was uniformly favorable both with regard to the President's tour and to Secretary Kissinger, while the Romanians have thus far refrained from commenting on the trip, limiting their coverage to brief, factual, and implicitly positive reports. Albanian comment, predictably hostile to the President and Kissinger, viewed the tour as symbolizing both conflict and "collusion" between Moscow and Washington.

**ORTHODOX ALLIES** Czechoslovakia's Bratislava PRAVDA on 13 June, viewing the President's trip as "unquestionably the high point of a demonstration of the 'new' U.S. policy" in the Middle East, charged at the same time that the United States and "other imperialist forces" aimed, as before, at capitalist exploitation and undermining of progressive forces in the area. Dominant in U.S. thinking, the commentary added, was the realization that oil is found in the Arab countries, not in Israel. Another Bratislava paper, SMENA, declared on the 19th that the results of the President's visit to Israel confirmed that there were "no essential changes" in U.S. policy toward the Arabs or its political, financial, and military support to Israel. A Bratislava PRAVDA comment cited by CTK on the 20th linked the results of Nixon's Israel visit to the resumed bombing of Lebanese

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 28 -

villages and Palestinians, saying: "No small share of the responsibility for this situation lies on the United States, which continues its big military and economic support to Israel, the aggressor." On the 15th, a dispatch from RUDE PRAVO's Washington correspondent predicted that while the President would be welcomed throughout his tour, he would be repeatedly confronted with the "decisive," still unsolved Palestinian problem, first raised by President as-Sadat during the Cairo visit. The dispatch paid tribute to the results of Moscow's "patient and unostentatious diplomacy" in persuading the Arabs to accept a UN settlement.

The East Berlin domestic service on the 18th grudgingly praised the President for pressing Israel into a "change of course" toward a peaceful solution. The commentary doubted at the same time whether the President's influence could be "decisive" on this score. In the meager Bulgarian comment, a Beirut-datelined dispatch in the Sofia party daily RABOTNICHESKO DELO on the 18th remarked at the windup of the tour that, because of continued U.S. support for Israel--exemplified by a promised nuclear reactor--and the U.S. "neglect" of the Palestinian liberation movement, "the problems remain."

While Prague, Sofia, and East Berlin took a largely cynical view regarding allegedly unchanged U.S. pro-Israeli policy, Poland and Hungary were relatively muted on this score. Thus, ZYCIE WARSZAWY on the 12th was favorable in tone in attributing two basic aims to the President's trip: First, to convince the Arabs through aid agreements that the present, more evenhanded U.S. policy represented "a durable change"; and second, to show Moscow, on the eve of the President's trip there, his readiness to cooperate with the USSR in restoring peace to the area. The paper noted in this connection that President Nixon "is known as a consistent advocate of detente and coexistence." And the Budapest daily MAGYAR NEMZET, also on the 12th, praised the timing of the trip--after the troop disengagement agreements and before the next phase of the Geneva negotiations and the Moscow summit--and predicted that a just settlement could be achieved "if all sides display good will." An 18 June commentary on Budapest domestic TV, while characterizing current U.S. Mideast policy as "a double game," assessed the overall results of the tour as "fruitful" and "successful" with regard to detente and to the President's standing at home.

**WATERGATE** In pointing to domestic motivations for the President's trip, Bratislava PRAVDA on the 12th stressed that he "is under the furious pressures of the adversaries of detente, and this is reflected in the course of the Watergate affair" and the

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 29 -

Congressional impeachment deliberations. In favorable tones, the commentary noted that the Middle East trip could divert attention from these domestic matters and direct it toward the Nixon Administration's efforts to complete the transition from a policy of confrontation to one of negotiation. In a similar vein, a talk on the Budapest domestic radio on the 10th remarked that "while the wrangling over the raising of impeachment charges is in progress in Congress and in other forums, the American President is obviously concentrating his efforts on international diplomacy." And the 12 June ZYCIE WARSZAWY also gave the President the benefit of the doubt in commenting that "it would be a considerable simplification to place this trip, as some commentators are doing, merely in the context of the political showdown between the White House and Congress," adding that "its scope and significance reach far beyond Washington." A favorable overall assessment of the tour carried by Warsaw's PAP on the 20th, which highlighted the President's promise of a nuclear reactor to Egypt, concluded that "the visit was undoubtedly a success for Nixon, though it is doubtful whether this success will put an end to the Watergate affair."

**KISSINGER** The Hungarians, followed by Czechoslovakia and Poland, promptly denounced the charges against Secretary Kissinger which occasioned his threat to resign at his 11 June press conference in Salzburg. Early the next day the Budapest radio carried a comment from its New York correspondent to the effect that, in the U.S. domestic controversy, "the attack is now directed, through the person of the Secretary of State, against the main foreign policy line of the Nixon Administration." A Budapest TV commentary the same day predicted that the possibility of Kissinger's resignation would cast a shadow over the President's talks with both Arab and Israeli leaders. This talk, as well as the government paper MAGYAR HIRLAP the next day, publicized favorable comments on Kissinger by Senator Fulbright and other Congressional leaders.

Subsequent attacks on the Secretary's critics by Polish media culminated in a 16 June Broniarek commentary in the party daily TRYBUNA LUDU. Entitled "Rumors and Insinuations," the article construed the charges against Kissinger as a warning from pro-Israeli elements to the Secretary and President Nixon that they should not lose sight of Israel's interests during negotiations with the Arabs. The article also characterized the charges as "a new stage (since H. Kissinger has been spared up to now)" of the alleged campaign by U.S. politicians, such as Senator Jackson, against U.S.-Soviet detente.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 30 -

A Washington correspondent's dispatch published in Prague's RUDE PRAVO on the 14th, while cautioning that speculation regarding Kissinger's guilt or innocence would be premature, denounced the raising of "old charges" against the Secretary at this juncture--at the start of the President's Mideast trip and before the Moscow summit. Charging that the Washington POST played "a considerable part in the anti-Kissinger campaign," the dispatch added that "once it proved impossible to wreck Nixon's trip to Moscow, Kissinger was placed on the firing line."

**ROMANIA** As the only East European country maintaining diplomatic relations with Israel, Romania was virtually silent about the trip, limiting its coverage to terse reports. Bucharest was characteristically circumspect. By refraining from comment it avoided having to join or break with the other Warsaw Pact countries in their praise of the Soviet Union's role in the Middle East situation. The party daily SCINTEIA noted in a Cairo dispatch on the 12th that the "normalization" of U.S.-Egyptian relations was taking place "in the framework of important developments which occurred in the Mideast situation, that is, the Geneva conference and the disengagement on the Sinai and Golan fronts." However, it avoided any reference to either the U.S. or Soviet mediating roles. This contrasted with a 1 June SCINTEIA article on the Syrian-Israeli disengagement, in which Gromyko and the Soviet Union were given praise equal to that for Kissinger and the United States.

**YUGOSLAVIA** Belgrade media took a positive view of the President's initiative in visiting the Mideast, but optimism that the visit would serve a useful purpose was qualified by concern about the U.S. attitude toward the Palestinian issue. Belgrade generally displayed little concern that the visit might create problems in U.S.-Soviet or Arab-Soviet relations.

Describing the visit as "undoubtedly useful," BORBA on the 11th viewed it as necessary to "disclose the depth and complexity" of the Mideast crisis but noted that its "full significance" would be measured by progress achieved in settling the crisis. On the day of the President's arrival in Egypt, Belgrade radio commentator Milutin Milenkovic pointed out Arab satisfaction with the trend in U.S. relations, citing the opinion of unnamed Arab sources that the United States had "essentially changed its position" on the Mideast situation and was adopting an "objective, and even a neutral, mediating" role between the Arabs and Israelis. Milenkovic qualified these observations by noting that "no real breaking up of the real alliance" with Israel had occurred.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 31 -

Belgrade repeatedly emphasized that the Mideast crisis could not be settled without resolving the Palestinian question, and on the 15th a TANJUG commentary singled out as the "greatest result" of the visit up to that time the U.S.-Egyptian statement recognizing the "interests" of the Palestinians. TANJUG pointed out, however, the distinction between "interests" and "a real act of granting recognition to the national rights of the People of Palestine," which "is still rejected in practice." TANJUG raised the Palestinian question again on the 20th noting that throughout the remainder of the trip the President was unwilling to go beyond the Cairo statement. Moreover, it reported that Kissinger's remark in Jerusalem about bringing the Palestinians into negotiations through Jordan had caused Arab "protests" and "may bring about new conflicts and even a more complicated situation in international relations."

Yugoslav comment on Moscow's attitude toward the trip shifted somewhat following the tumultuous welcome given the President in Egypt. A Teslic BORBA commentary on the 11th, the day before his arrival, maintained that the visit was "welcomed" not only by the Arabs and the Israelis but also by the Soviet Union, which saw the tour as a "component and indispensable part of joint American-Soviet efforts to reach a just solution of the crisis through negotiations in Geneva." The Egyptians' enthusiastic welcome for Nixon, however, seemed to raise questions about possible Soviet irritation. On the 17th Zagreb radio commentator Milika Sundic described the Cairo treatment as an "embarrassing episode" which, he said, would be "quickly forgotten, if for no other reason than because it is not in the interest of the United States to upset relations with Moscow." Claiming that Washington-Moscow relations remained not only good "but even better," Sundic predicted that Cairo would do all in its power to "iron out its difficulties with Moscow as soon as possible."

Comment on Kissinger's Salzburg press conference was generally sympathetic. On the day after the news conference TANJUG cited Arab press comment that allegations against Kissinger were the result of a "Zionist conspiracy" aimed at undermining the visit, and Belgrade radio commentator Kosta Timotijevic forecast that Kissinger "has all the chances to survive politically both the present and who knows how many future presidents."

ALBANIA Tirana comment emphasized that the United States had not abandoned its close ties with Israel and that President Nixon was aiming at strengthening Washington's "imperialist" influence in the Arab countries at the expense of Moscow, even though

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 32 -

the two big powers continued to operate in "collusion" against
the Arabs. On the opening day of the trip the Tirana domestic
radio, in an unattributed commentary, outlined the President's
three main objectives: To present U.S. "imperialism" as "peace-
loving" and to gain "political capital at home"; to erase the image
in Arab minds of the United States as "pro-Israeli, warmongering
and profoundly hostile" to the Arabs; and to "undermine" Moscow's
position, just as Moscow was trying to do to Washington. The
Washington-Moscow rivalry, however, was viewed as tempered by an
"understanding" between the two that fundamental Mideast problems
should remain unsettled so that the two superpowers could emerge
in the future in the role of "arbiters of the fate of the Arab
peoples under the guise of so-called special responsibilities"
in the Mideast.

The party daily ZERI I POPULLIT, in an article carried in full
by ATA on the 13th, contended that President Nixon was practically
forced to visit the Arab states in order to seek a "disengagement"
between them and the United States once he had seen the "dark
perspective" both for the United States and Israel following Arab
successes in the October war, the oil embargo, and rising public
opinion in favor of the Arabs. The daily warned the Arabs to be-
ware of "vain promises for peace" and "various diplomatic maneuvers."

Picking up American press reports on Kissinger's alleged wire-
tapping role, Tirana portrayed the allegations as facts. In an
unattributed article titled "Kissinger--Participant in the Water-
gate Scandal," ZERI I POPULLIT on the 11th cited the Washington
STAR-NEWS as reporting that "he had failed to speak the truth"
in testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee last
September. Although Kissinger's Salzburg press conference was
ignored, ATA on the 18th interpreted the Mideast visit as designed
to save both Nixon's and Kissinger's "skins."

CHINA

Peking has thus far restricted coverage of the trip to brief,
straightforward NCNA reports that have focused on the President's
stays in Egypt and Syria and have given only passing mention to
other Middle East stops. Peking has not mentioned the U.S. offers
of nuclear power assistance to Egypt and Israel. A 15 June NCNA
report on the President's talks in Egypt acknowledged the consolidation
of U.S.-Egyptian relations, noted the two sides' declaration of
principles, and stressed progress toward bilateral economic cooperation.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 33 -

The report indirectly demonstrated continuing U.S.-Egyptian
differences over Middle East political questions, citing Sadat's
stress on the need for respecting Palestinian national rights
while noting the President's acknowledgement that he had not
come "with ready-made solutions for these complex problems."
A shorter 17 June NCNA report on the President's stay in Syria
highlighted the agreement to reestablish diplomatic relations
that had capped his talks with President Asad.

A 6 June NCNA article pegged to the White House announcement of the President's Middle East trip had taken pains to portray the journey as the latest step in the successful U.S. advance in the area, at Soviet expense, since the October 1973 war. It had noted Washington's achievements in bringing about the troop disengagement agreements, cited Secretary Kissinger's 4 June testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that the United States was determined to strengthen the recent tendency of Arab states to end their one-sided reliance on Moscow, and reported the Secretary's defense of U.S. aid appropriations for Arab nations. Linking President Nixon's Middle East tour with his upcoming trip to Moscow, NCNA had also cited Western press observations that the former trip served to demonstrate a strong U.S. position, while underlining the weakening of the Soviet stances on the eve of the Moscow summit.

OTHER ASIAN COMMUNIST

VIETNAM North and South Vietnamese communist media reported only the barest details of the President's itinerary and played up evidence of alleged U.S. duplicity, in effect warning against Arab cooperation with the United States. The first Hanoi reference to the President's tour came in a 3 June article in the North Vietnamese party paper NHAN DAN, which contended that the United States is pursuing its own unchanged interests in the Middle East. The article recalled Secretary Kissinger's recent diplomatic efforts in the area--saying that the Secretary has presented President Nixon with "a passport to return to the Middle East"--and went on to sarcastically question the portrayal of Kissinger as the Arabs' "friend, as a reliable negotiator who lives up to his promises" and to maintain that Washington is trying to protect Israel and divide the Arab states. The article was critical of Egypt's improvement of relations with the United States, but noted with approval evidence of continuing Syrian circumspection.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 34 -

During and after the tour Vietnamese communist media ignored the reception given the President in Arab countries but publicized a statement by Yasir 'Arafat that the Palestinian "revolutionaries" would not lay down their arms until they achieve their objectives. Hanoi media and Liberation Radio predictably reported Israel's retaliatory air strikes in Lebanon after the President's departure and quoted a Beirut paper charging that Nixon had given the green light for the attacks.

NORTH KOREA, MONGOLIA

The monitored Pyongyang radio and KCNA transmissions from North Korea, and

Mongolian People's Republic media have not been heard to either report or comment upon President Nixon's Middle East visits.

CUBA

Havana's reaction was predictably negative and keyed to the themes that Watergate and U.S. imperialist ambitions were the prime factors motivating the President's tour. Derogatory comment was included in both the running news accounts of the President's progress and in several more extensive commentaries carried in domestic radio and television programs.

Havana on 11 June carried a Vienna-datelined report on the President's arrival in Salzburg which referred to his attempt "to offset his political downfall brought about by the Watergate scandal," and to the U.S. interest in repairing the effects of the long years of "eroded contacts" brought about by the policy of backing Zionism. Another broadcast the same day stressed "the ostentatious display of security" at Salzburg and quoted Lebanese press comment that the purpose of the trip was "to spread imperialist economic-political influence" among the Arabs.

Among the commentaries, the most pointed and authoritative was a talk by Jose Maria Gonzalez Jerez over Havana television on 20 June. Admitting that the tour represented a gain for Nixon personally and for U.S. goals in the Middle East, Gonzalez summed up the results of the trip in the following terms: The prospect of developing economic-political relations with Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Jordan; the resumption of diplomatic relations with Syria; the strengthening of all kinds of bonds with Israel"; and, as a bonus, "the wealth of wisdom Nixon acquired."

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 35 -

At the same time, Gonzales stressed the unchanging nature of U.S. interests in the area. Nixon's commitments to the Arab countries--financial aid, investments, and technological aid that included a nuclear reactor for peaceful purposes--were, Gonzalez stressed, much more ambiguous than what he pledged to Israel." Israel, Gonzalez added, was pleased with Nixon's visit, "not because of his tranquillizing words but because of the agreements that were signed."

Gonzalez detailed the general terms of the U.S.-Israeli joint communique. He noted that the condemnation of terrorism "totally suits the theses of Israel," as it sounded a warning to its neighbors, and he asserted that Nixon had spoken of peace "but always in general terms." Gonzalez said Nixon had "evaded" the Palestinian problem in talks with the Arabs. Kissinger "spoke out more clearly" on the issue, Gonzalez added. He pointed out that the Secretary of State's view that the Palestinians should be present at the Geneva talks fitted in with "Israel's thinking."

In conclusion, Gonzalez said the reactionary press tries to make Nixon out as "the arbiter of the Mideast situation and a friend of the Arab people" in an effort to obscure his "direct complicity with Israel's aggression." "Such propaganda," Gonzales said, "clashes with reality" and aims at isolating the Arabs from their real friends, the Soviet Union and the socialist countries. The clear-cut goal of this propaganda is to divide the Arabs and to consolidate imperialist positions in the Middle East, "to the detriment of the Arab people's just cause."

The regional Matanzas domestic service commentator, David Segura Nunez, in a 14 June talk entitled "Allah Bless Nixon," ridiculed the reception accorded Nixon on his arrival in Cairo. Suggesting that the reception that greeted "the Yankee chief of state" was a staged affair, Segura Nunez said: "It is inconceivable that the Egyptians, the same people who have frequently been forced to endure the results of Zionist aggression contrived by U.S. aggressive circles, have a sincere desire to cheer such a notorious and accomplished genocidal felon. . . ."

Without mentioning President Sadat, Segura Nunez said it was difficult to speculate "on a leader's conduct in abandoning the scenario of the people's struggle." He added: "We would like to believe no other leaders under any conditions would have allowed this masquerade of the masses. . . ." Segura Nunez concluded that "it is not for nothing that Israel is spoken of as the 51st state. . . ."

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FBIS REACTION REPORT

21 JUNE 1974

- 36 -

Guido Garcia Inclan, in his commentary "Letter from Freddy" on 18 June, speculated that Nixon's promises of loans to the Arabs would not be regarded favorably in the U.S. Senate.

Kissinger's role was noted, and sometimes disparaged, in several news reports and commentaries. Havana television and radio on 11 June reported Kissinger's press conference, pointing out that his threat to resign was made on "the eve of Nixon's Mideast visits" and "outside his own country." David Segura Nunez in another regional Matanzas domestic service commentary entitled "Mandrake the Magician in a Spot," on 12 June, scoffed at Kissinger's supposed "unbelievable feats" with regard to Vietnam and the Golan Heights.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

VV FGQ375EHR620

RR RUFHSU
DE RUFNPS #5872/01 1721458
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
R 211456Z JUN 74
FM AMEMBASSY PARIS
TO AMEMBASSY MOSCOW 6507
BT

LIMITED OFFICIAL USE

<table><tr><td>ACTION:</td><td>9/5-15</td></tr><tr><td>INFO:</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>AMB</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>MIN</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>POL</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>ECON</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>P&C</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>CONS</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>ADMIN</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>USDAO</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>SCI</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>AGRIC</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>FILES</td><td>1</td></tr></table>

RECEIVED

Jun 24 17 12.74

AMERICAN ENBASSY
MOSCOW U.S.S.R.

LIMITED OFFICIAL USE SECTION 01 OF 02 AMEMBASSY PARIS 15872

FOR THE SECRETARY'S PARTY

E.O. 11652: N/A

TAGS: OVIP (KISSINGER, HENRY)

SUBJECT: RAYMOND ARON ARTICLE ABOUT SECRETARY KISSINGER

1. IN VIEW OF MEETING WITH RAYMOND ARON SCHEDULED FOR JULY 4, SECRETARY MAY WISH TO READ ARON'S ARTICLE IN LE FIGARO OF JUNE 25 ANALYZING BACKGROUND TO SECRETARY'S SALZBURG PRESS CONFERENCE. FULL TEXT FOLLOWS:

2. WHEN RICHARD NIXON, MORE THAN FIVE YEARS AGO, WAS INSTALLED AT THE WHITE HOUSE, THE AMERICAN REPUBLIC SEEMED TO BE SLIDING TOWARDS DECLINE. THE VIETNAM WAR, RACIAL ROUBLES, THE YOUTH REVOLT, THE CRISIS OF THE DOLLAR, THE ECONOMIC CHALLENGE OF WESTERN EUROPE AND OF JAPAN, THE MILITARY REINFORCEMENT OF THE SOVIET UNION -- THESE EVENTS, AT HOME AND ABROAD, SHOWED THE BEGINNING OF THE END OF AN ERA. THE POST-WAR PERIOD WAS ENDING AND, WITH IT, THE PREDOMINANCE OF THE STATE WHICH HAD WON THE WAR WITHOUT PAYING THE TERRIBLE PRICE THAT THE OTHER WINNERS ON EUROPEAN TERRITORY HAD HAD TO PAY.

3. THE SAME RICHARD NIXON RECENTLY CAME BACK FROM A TRIUMPHANT JOURNEY IN THE NEAR AND MIDDLE EAST, ACCLAIMED BY EGYPTIAN CROWDS, WHO USED TO RIOT AGAINST AMERICAN IMPERIALISM. HE IS ABOUT TO GO TO MOSCOW IN ORDER TO CONSECRATE, ONCE MORE, DETENTE, AND MAYBE TO SIGN NEW ACCORDS. HIT BY THE PRICE RISE OF OIL, THE ECONOMIES OF JAPAN AND OF WESTERN EUROPE DO NOT SEEM ANY LONGER, AT LEAST FOR A FEW YEARS, LIKE RIVALS. THE VAGARIES OF EUROPEAN UNION HAVE COME TO A STANDSTILL IN THE ARABIAN SAND. PEACE HAS RETURNED TO THE GHETTOS AND THE CAMPUSES. AND THE MAN WHO PRESIDED OVER THIS SPECTACULAR RECOVERY HAS BEEN SUFFERING, FOR THE LAST EIGHTEEN MONTHS, FROM AN UNINTERRUPTED ASSAULT: NEWSPAPERS, HOUSE AND SENATE COMMITTEES OF INQUIRY, JUDGES, ARE ALL ATTACKING THE PRESIDENT, WHOSE IMPEACHMENT AND RESIGNATION (OR CONDEMNATION) ARE, ACCORDING TO THE LATEST POLLS, WISHED FOR BY A MAJORITY OF AMERICANS. ONE NAME SYMBOLIZES THE TRIUMPH, HENRY KISSINGER; ANOTHER, THE TRAGEDY: WATERGATE. A FEW DAYS AGO, SUPREME SCANDAL, THE NEWSPAPERMEN PUT THESE TWO NAMES TOGETHER. AND THE BOMB EXPLODED.

4. SOME OBSERVERS SEE IN THE WATERGATE AFFAIR, THE EXPRESSION OF DISTRUST WHICH THE LIBERALS OF THE EASTERN COAST ARE DEMONSTRATING TOWARD THE ACCUSER OF ALGER HISS, THE PENNYLESS LAWYER WHO REACHED THE PRESIDENCY BY VIRTUE OF OBSTINACY. AT SOME POINT HE (KISSINGER) SAID: "TOO MUCH, IT'S TOO MUCH." ABOUT 50 SENATORS SHARED HIS SENTIMENT, SUDDENLY FORGETTING THE PRINCIPLES UNDER WHOSE NAME THEY ATTACKED THE PRESIDENT, AND VOUCHED FOR THE VERACITY AND THE CREDIBILITY OF A MAN WHO HAS BEEN HAVING, DESPITE EVERYTHING FOR THE LAST FIVE YEARS, SPECIAL RELATIONS WITH THE "SUSPECT" OF THE WHITE HOUSE.

P2 PARIS 15872

LIMITED OFFICIAL USE

5. MORE ASTONISHING, HOWEVER, THAN THE ATTITUDE OF THE SENATORS WAS HENRY KISSINGER'S PRESS CONFERENCE IN SALZBURG. THE SECRETARY OF STATE WAS SUDDENLY VIOLATING THE UNWRITTEN LAW BY WHICH THE WATERGATE AFFAIR DOES NOT GO BEYOND THE FRONTIERS OF THE REPUBLIC. AT HOME, FOR THE CITIZENS AND THE ELECTED MEMBERS OF THE REPUBLIC, RICHARD NIXON, FIGHTING AGAINST A JUDICIAL MACHINERY, OF WHICH NO FOREIGNER CAN UNDERSTAND FULLY THE SECRETS, THE SLOWNESS AND THE POWER, APPEARS LIKE THE ACCUSED AND ALREADY A CO-CONSPIRATOR: THOSE WHO SURROUNDED HIM DURING HIS FIRST ADMINISTRATION WILL BE JUDGED, UNLESS THEY HAVE ALREADY GONE THROUGH THE RIGOR OF THE LAWS. BEYOND THE NATIONAL FRONTIER, THE PRESIDENT REMAINS THE PRESIDENT. AS LONG AS HE IS NOT ACCUSED, HE REPRESENTS THE UNITED STATES AND HE IS THE ONE WHO HAS HIS FINGER ON THE NUCLEAR TRIGGER. ALL OF THIS IS TAKING PLACE LIKE A POLICE THRILLER IN AMERICAN LITERATURE: DOUBT, WHICH SUBSISTS AS TO THE CULPABILITY OF THE SUSPECT, HELPS HIM EVEN IN THE FULFILLMENT OF HIS FUNCTIONS AS PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC. THIS SITUATION,

UNTHINKABLE OUTSIDE OF THAT COUNTRY OF LEGALISTS, IS PROBABLY JUDGED AS MORE THAN A BIT STRANGE BY AMERICANS. IT DOES NOT INSPIRE IN THEM THE SENTIMENTS OF STUPEFATION, OF INDIGNATION OR OF ADMIRATION FROM WHICH A NON-AMERICAN HAS DIFFICULTY IN DEFENDING HIMSELF, SENTIMENTS WHICH THE TEARS AND DECLARATIONS OF HENRY KISSINGER HAVE EMBELLISHED. FOR THE LAST 18 MONTHS, HE, WHO, IN SPITE OF EVERYTHING, HAS KEPT THE SUPREME RESPONSIBILITIES, HAS VAINLY TRIED TO DEMONSTRATE THAT HE IS NOT A CROOK. HE IS ACCUSED OF HAVING CHEATED ON HIS TAXES, CONSPIRED TO PARALYZE THE ACTION OF JUSTICE, UTILIZED TO HIS PERSONAL PROFIT THE MONEY OF THE STATE, ACCORDED TO SEVERAL PERSONS AND ENTERPRISES ADVANTAGES TO REWARD THEM FOR HAVING FINANCED HIS ELECTION. IT IS ALLEGED THAT HE MADE A FALSE OATH, THAT HE WOULD HAVE ERASED FRAGMENTS OF RECORDINGS AND REFUSED CERTAIN RECORDINGS WHICH WOULD BRING EVIDENCE AGAINST HIM. ALL THIS DID NOT PREVENT AMERICAN DIPLOMACY FROM GAINING INCREDIBLE SUCCESSES MADE POSSIBLE BY EVENTS OR BY ITS OWN ABILITY. AND THE SLIGHTEST ATTACK ON THE HONOR OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE, THE LEAST SUSPICION ABOUT HIS VERACITY, WOULD ACCOMPLISH ALL AT ONCE WHAT 18 MONTHS OF AN IMPLACABLE CAMPAIGN AGAINST THE PRESIDENT WOULD NOT HAVE ACCOMPLISHED, THAT IS, TO PARALYZE AMERICAN DIPLOMACY.

6. TRULY, ONE IS NOT SURPRISED THAT, FROM WHAT THE AMERICAN PRESS IS SAYING, THE PRESIDENT SEVERELY DISAPPROVED THE TIRADE OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE. SHOULD WE SAY "TIRADE" OR LEGITIMATE EXASPERATION OR UNJUSTIFIED EXASPERATION? HERE IS WHAT HAPPENED: LET THE READER CHOOSE HIS RESPONSE. THE FIRST AREA OF DISPUTE CONCERNS THE TESTIMONY UNDER OATH OF HENRY KISSINGER BEFORE THE FOREIGN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE OF THE SENATE BEFORE APPROVAL BY THE LATTER OF HIS NOMINATION: DID HE GIVE AN EXACT VERSION OF HIS RESPONSIBILITY IN THE WIRETAPPINGS OF MAY 1969? A CERTAIN NUMBER OF HIS COLLABORATORS WERE THE OBJECT OF THESE WIRETAPPINGS. HE ADMITS HAVING FURNISHED NAMES; HE DOES NOT PRETEND HAVING DISAPPROVED THIS PRACTICE: "LEAKS," REVELATIONS TO THE PRESS OF NATIONAL SECRETS, FURNISH AN EXPLANATION, IF NOT A JUSTIFICATION. THE CONTROVERSY CONCERNS THE ROLE PLAYED BY KISSINGER HIMSELF: DID HE ATTENUATE IT IN HIS TESTIMONY BEFORE THE COMMITTEE? WAS HE, MORE THAN HE SAID, THE INITIATOR OF THESE WIRETAPPINGS?

Did Henry Kissinger
want Israel to lose
the Yom Kippur war?

Two weeks after he became Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger was faced with a baptism of fire ... war in the Middle East. What he did in the next 20 days—including convincing Israel to abandon a strategy that had worked for 25 years —ended in triumph eight months later. Find out how he faced that “murderously dangerous” situation last October ... in a special report by Marvin and Bernard Kalb.

Sunday in
The New York Times
Magazine

Mr. McClory remarked, "The presentation we heard today lends to vindicate the President."

Even Representatives Robert F. Drinan of Massachusetts and Jerome R. Waldie of California—two of the Democrats who have been strong critics of the President—said that they found little in the tax presentation that would lead to impeachment.

Last April 3, the President announced that he had been assessed and would pay $432,787.13 in back taxes plus interest. The announcement came after both the Internal Revenue Service and the staff of the Congressional Joint Committee on Internal Revenue Taxation had conducted thorough audits of his tax returns for the years 1969 through 1972.

The figure cited by the President apparently included the negligence penalty, which experts set in the neighborhood of $14,000.

The sum the President promised to pay was the amount assessed by the I.R.S. Details of the delinquencies discovered by the Revenue Service have not been disclosed, but they were available to the Judiciary Committee members today.

## Same Areas Probable

The Congressional investigators found underpayments totaling $442,022 and made public a thorough report of their inquiry.

and failed to report and six different categories of deductions that they said he took without being entitled to do so.

Judiciary Committee members confirmed today that the revenue service, like the joint that Mr. Nixon acted improperly when he claimed deductions on $576,000 of income for what he said was a gift of his pre-Presidential papers to the national archives.

The law prohibits deductions on gifts of such papers after July, 1969, and the revenue service was said to have concluded that the President's gift was not made before that date.

Frank DeMarco Jr., a lawyer who advised Mr. Nixon on tax matters, has conceded that he backdated the deed for the gift of the papers to show that the donation was made while a deduction could still be claimed.

If Mr. Nixon knew of the backdating and cquiesced in it, he might be involved in fraud, but committee members said today that they heard no evidence that the President had known.

## Members Disagree

Some members of the committee believ that fraud must be proved before an impeachable offense based on the President's tax payments could be considered.

But others disagreed. Representative Jack Brooks, Demo-

Pax Henrica

By Bernard A. Weisberger

No one since the eighteenth century has seriously argued the possibility of miracles in the natural world. And nobody in the twentieth, with any sophistication, or historical sensitivity, ought to believe, either, in political or diplomatic miracle-workers. All the more reason why the press should have been modern enough in outlook to refrain from making Henry A. Kissinger some kind of a wonder-worker who can divide the Red Sea or make the sun stand still.

No wonder he is irritated. It is hard to be canonized on one day and asked on the next if you are capable of the prosaic sin of lying.

Mr. Kissinger is the victim, and the beneficiary, of what might be called media cultural lag. Old-fashioned historians subscribed to the idea embodied in an Emersonian sentence: "An institution is the lengthened shadow of one man." History has been rife with what Emerson's friend and mentor, Thomas Carlyle, called "heroes and hero-worship." Cromwells, Luthers, Napoleons—these men did not simply exist in history; rather, they made history happen.

But good historical thinking has long ago discarded the "great-man" theory of causation. Any good, practicing historian, biographer, or simple graduate student knows, of course, that outstanding men, given power at the right instant, have some effect on their times. And that they also mirror them, symbolize them, typify them.

But historians also know that in the end great social forces have their own momentum. There would have been an America without Columbus, a Revolution without Washington, a Civil War without Lincoln, a Standard Oil without Rockefeller, a United Nations

without Franklin D. Roosevelt.

The timing, the style, the immediate reverberations might have differed. But too many factors—inventions, social changes, economic shifts, new ideas, and even simple accidents—go into the final assembly of an historical event to allow the credit or blame to go to one man.

So let it be with Pax Henrica. No one should undervalue his vision, persistence or persuasiveness. Or even deny Mr. Nixon credit for abandoning his cold war past, and his conservative supporters, in order to free Mr. Kissinger to become the prophet of détente.

Nonetheless, various forces have been pushing the great powers toward accommodation for the last ten years. Among them are the Chinese-Soviet rift, the resurgence of domestic politics in the United States, the increasing interdependence of national economies, the growing cost and frightfulness of weapons, the explosive potential of unrealized aspirations in underdeveloped countries. In the capitals of all secure nations, ears have been cocked for messages that promise stability in return for concessions.

Mr. Kissinger has brought that message. He is the right voice at the right time. But newsmen owe it to their readers to explain that the "right time" has come about because of many changes that Mr. Kissinger had nothing to do with.

Newsmen, in short, should have as much savvy as historians. They should not exalt public figures one day and depose them the next. They ought, instead, to see men and events in whole and human perspective—that is, always fallible, and not always the masters of their own destiny. Or, in short, historically.

Bernard A. Weisberger, professor of history at Vassar, is author of "The American People."

for a corps.

After the end of the war, Sir Charles held an appointment at the War Office, and then for three years he commanded the British Army of the Rhine in Germany until he was appointed Commander in Chief, Far East Land Forces.

In 1953, the General took over his last active appointment as Commander in Chief Middle East Land Forces. His command was transferred to Cyprus in December, 1954, when the British bases in Suez were handed to Egypt.

Two years later, he was ordered by the Conservative Government under Prime Minister Anthony Eden to reoccupy those bases after Egypt's President Gamal Abdel Nasser had nationalized the Suez Canal Company.

The Anglo-French invasion linked with an attack by Israel and was near success when abandoned under pressure from President Dwight D. Eisenhower and an outcry in the United Nations.

## MRS. J. HARRIS KLONER

Mrs. Ada Land Kloner, former national treasurer of American Mizrachi Women and wife of J. Harris Kloner, a retired real estate investor, died Monday at her home in the Borough Park section of Brooklyn.

Campbell
Chapel

street, 'BU 8-3500

ers, contributions may be made to the
Heart Fund.

COHEN—Victor J. It is with deep sorrow that we mourn the untimely demise of our President, founder, and very dear friend. His simple and wisdom will always be an inspiration to those of us who had the privilege of working with him. To his dear wife, Rae, his devoted son, Jerome, daughter-in-law, Joan, beloved grandchildren, Robin and Michael, and sister, Anne Bondy, we extend our heartfelt sympathy.

The Employees of
WILLIAMS & CO. Inc. and

WILLIAMS Real Estate Co. Inc.

COHEN—Victor J. The Board of Trustees of Jewish Memorial Hospital records with profound sorrow the passing of Victor J. Cohen, philanthropist and strong supporter of our hospital. Sincere condolences are extended to the bereaved family.

DAVID A. DAWN, President.

MILTON S. HELLER,

Chairman of the Bd.

JESSE H. BARKIN,

Hon. Chairman of the Bd.

DAVID SCHWARTZ,

Hon. Chairman of the Bd.

COHEN—Victor J. The Manhattan League of Hebrew Kindergarten and Infants Home records with profound sorrow the passing of Victor Cohen, cherished husband of Rae Cohen, an esteemed Vice President. We have lost a valued friend whose devotion and generosity to "our children" will always be remembered. Heartfelt sympathies are extended to the bereaved families.

GERALDINE STRICKMAN, President.

COHEN—Victor J. The Junior Comm. of N.Y. Sec. National Council of Jewish Women records with sorrow the untimely passing of Victor Cohen, beloved husband of its esteemed and dedicated executive board member, Rae. Heartfelt condolences are extended to the entire family.

Mrs. CARL LEFF, Chairman

COHEN—Victor J. Park Avenue Synagogue records with sorrow the passing of its loyal and devoted member and expresses deepest sympathy to the bereaved family.

GEORGE M. SHAPIRO,

Chairman of the Board

DR. SEYMOUR WIMPFHEIMER,

President

COHEN—Victor J. It is with deep sorrow that we mourn the passing of the founder of our affiliated companies. We express our heartfelt condolences to the members of the bereaved family.

Willies Realty of L.I., Inc.

JULES BYRON, Pres.

COHEN—Victor J. The Board of Directors and staff of Child Study Association of America/Wel-Met Inc. express sincere condolences to Jerome Cohen, a member of the Board and his family on the death of his beloved father.

COHEN—Victor. The Officers and members of Elmwood Country Club. record with deep sorrow the passing of their esteemed member, Victor Cohen.

ROBERT L. BERMANT, President.

DE MARCO—Peter V., beloved husband of Irma, devoted father of Angelo and Eugene also survived by five grandchildren. Reposing at Farenza Bros. (Bronx Branch) 920 Allerton Ave. Funeral Friday 9 A.M. Mass Holy Rosary Church 10 A.M. Contributions to Heart Fund appreciated by family.

FELDBERG—Samuel M., 69, of 1301 Miami Garden Dr., No. Miami Beach, Fla. Passed away June 14, 1974. Employed by the Benrus Watch Co. for 41 yrs. retired in June, 1968 as Senior Vice President. Survived by wife, Bertha, daughter Barbara Firtell, 8301 S.W. 165th Terrace, Miami, Fla. 2 grandchildren Brian age 15 and Vicki age 11. Services were held June 16 at "The Riverside," 16480 N.E. 19th Ave., No. Miami Beach, Fla. with interment at Star of David Memorial Park, Miami. The family suggests donations to the Heilts' & Colitis Foundation Inc., 295 Madison Ave., N.Y.C., N.Y. 10017.

Orange, N.J. Wife of Don nor, mother of Dr. Paul of Marcus, Brian F. of 230 South Orange Street, New York. Son of Walter of New Vernon. Funeral mass will be off at The Valley Church, 11 A. day, June 22 at 11 A. Theresa Cemetery. Sum invited to attend and mark John J. Quinn Funeral Ave., Orange, Thursday, 2-5 and 7-10 P.M.

O'CONNOR—Mary (nee She 1974, native of Dromed pane, County Kerry, Ireland of the late Timothy ( devoted mother of Rev. J. O'Connor and the late O'Connor. Dear sister Reposing at Buckley F. W. 43rd St., N.Y.C. M. Burial, Mt. Carmel H of St., Friday, 10 A.M. Cemetery. In lieu of flowers Visiting hours 1 to 9 P.M.

PADWEE—Frances (nee June 18, 1974, of 240 Englewood, N.J. Wife of Padwee. Beloved mother Padwee, Zelda Bing and grun. Loving grandmother Barl Bing, Leslie and The funeral from the St. Philip Apter & Son, 160 Maplewood, N.J. on Fri 11 A.M. Interment Temple Memorial Park, Union, flowers, contributions to N.J. chapter of Hadassa by the family.

PARENT—Alvah Kibbitt, c. 1910. Son of the late Albert Cobb. Parent of Elm Grove sister of Mrs. Barbara NYC. Service at St. Bar Park Ave. at 51st St., F. lieu of flowers, contribution to Columbia Presbytery for Cancer Research, New York City.

RATH—Anna Catherine, N.Y., on June 18, 1974. Gustave C. Rath. Sister. Also, surviving are 11 n. The family will be pres McGrath & Son Funeral N.Y. between the hours Wednesday. Service at 11 Thursday, June 20 at 2

REEVES—Mary Chisholmon Road, Stamford, June 17, 1974. Wife of Sr., Mother of Clifford Mrs. Lee Winston, Grand Winston and Christopher memorial service will morning at 11 o'clock Pelham Manor, N.Y. memorial gifts to a cha would be preferred.

ROBERTS—Ann, on June the late Chester Hoyt mother of Doris Robe grandmother of Michael sister of Lillian Joffe tzer. Friends may call beli, Madison Ave. at 8 1-4 P.M. and 6-10 P.M. day, 11:30 A.M. In Cem.

SALTZMAN—Ann. Beloved voted mother of Dolores Saltzman, Dear sister. levard Chapels, 312 C at Prospect Park, Bro 1 P.M.

SALTZMAN—Samuel. Be Sophie, devoted father and dear brother of S. Charles Saltman, Iovi Alan and Carol. Funeral June 20, Parkside, Jer

per losses by the railways totaled more than $125-million in 1972, according to the Canadian Transport Commission.

Canadian National, which has more lines than Canadian Pacific, is estimated to carry 60 per cent of the nation's rail passenger traffic. The Government railway, run by an autonomous crown corporation, has been insulated from "interference by politicians," as an official put it. The new program would change this.

## Settlement to Be Arranged

Details of the take-over of passenger service, including a financial settlement for Canadian Pacific, are to be determined by negotiation, Mr. Marchand said.

He said that introduction of high-speed trains on lines between principal cities would be given high priority, as would improved bus services and more air service to settlements in the far North and other remote areas.

The Government proposal envisions assistance to small privately owned airlines serving the outposts, to enable them to increase their schedules.

The program includes proposals for upgrading of port facilities to cope with the doubling of Canadian exports expected in the next decade, Mr. Marchand said.

The Minister also said that the Government would foster

Our swivel chair...

New Kissinger Data Asked

By Murrey Marder

Washington Post Staff Writer

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee requested additional documents from the Justice Department yesterday for its new review of Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger's involvement in governmental wiretapping.

Committee members said the issue for them is not the wiretapping as such, but whether the committee would have confirmed Kissinger last September on all the information now available.

Chairman J. W. Fulbright (D-Ark.) told newsmen "there are what appear to be gaps" in the information obtained so far, although he said the Justice Department has been cooperative. A Justice spokesman said the new request for information is "under consideration."

Committee sources said "a

thorough" inquiry is intended, "without any deadline."

Kissinger said at a news conference in Salzburg, Austria, on June 11, that "I will resign" if what he described as an assault on "my public honor" over his original testimony last September on the wiretapping "is not cleared up."

It was learned that in yesterday's closed committee meeting Fulbright offered to step aside from the renewed inquiry, out of irritation over a proposed Senate resolution last week hailing Kissinger's integrity and veracity before the new wiretapping review even begins.

Fulbright on Friday publicly criticized that resolution, on grounds that it makes the new inquiry "look like a charade." The resolution was introduced by Sen. James B. Allen (D-

Ala.) and swiftly gained 51 sponsors.

Several members of the Fulbright group who had signed the laudatory Kissinger resolution offered yesterday to withdraw their names from it and induced Fulbright to pursue the new inquiry. One senator said signers assured Fulbright they were not trying to prejudge anything but had signed the resolution only "to give a cheer for a guy who seemed to be down."

Fulbright, who also has been an enthusiastic supporter of Kissinger, said his committee has agreed unanimously to pursue the new investigation, and said it is imperative to determine whether Kissinger told the "full truth" about the wiretaps during his confirmation hearings.

Kissinger said then that he did not "initiate" the wiretapping of 17 government officials and newsmen between 1969 and 1971, but only supplied names for a national security investigation ordered by President Nixon. However, memoranda from the late FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, recently supplied to the House Judiciary Committee, portray Kissinger as a prime mover in the wiretapping. Kissinger bitterly protested this, noting

that the same information was examined in private by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee last September when it cleared his confirmation.

Fulbright noted yesterday that Kissinger is scheduled to testify before the committee Friday in closed session on his Middle East diplomacy and on the forthcoming Moscow summit meeting. Fulbright said it is improbable, however, that the wiretapping dispute can be resolved before Kissinger leaves with President Nixon Tuesday for Moscow.

Senate Republican leader Hugh Scott (Pa.) said yesterday that "I think Dr. Kissinger is entitled to have his honor given back to him unstained and untarnished, and I think the committee will do just that."

In other actions, the committee approved the nomination of former Secretary of Labor James D. Hodgson to be ambassador to Japan, with Fulbright saying he and Sen. Stuart Symington (D-Mo.) voted against Hodgson. The committee also approved Thomas C. Enders to be assistant secretary of state for economic affairs and David E. Mark to be ambassador to Burundi. Both are career diplomats.

Marriage, Divorce Both Easy

good dishwashing detergent. Many
women do the family laundry by hand
every day, in the kitchen sink or bath-
tub.

Westerners spoiled by the abun-
dance of their wealth may find it hard
to believe that Russians can live this
way, but they do, millions of them hap-
pily.

Russians don't compare their lives to
Americans' or West Germans', but to
the Russian past. By that standard the
vast majority seems to believe they are
doing very well. Before the 1950s al-
most no one in Moscow outside the rul-
ing elite could think of living in his
own apartment; now two-thirds of the
population do. Consumer goods and
food products are almost all more
abundant than 10 or 15 years ago. Life
is improving—by fits and starts, but
inexorably.

The burdens of daily life fall most
heavily on women in Soviet society.
They fulfill the historic woman's role

NATO
(CONTINUED)

scheduled to be signed next week in Brussels at a NATO summit meeting to be attended by President Nixon before he goes to Moscow.

Kissinger told his colleagues that the declaration fulfills his goal—first expressed in April 1978—of breathing new life into the European-American relationship.

Kissinger briefed the foreign ministers on the Middle East and the Moscow summit preparations for two hours, British Foreign Secretary James Callaghan told reporters that they had agreed that the Europeans "will provide the economic umbrella and leave Kissinger free to concentrate on the political side."

"He doesn't want us interfering with his peace initiatives," Callaghan said.

West German officials said that the Common Market countries would go ahead with plans to meet Arab leaders to discuss economic deals only after consultation with the United States. The officials said that there was no intention to have a European meeting with an Arab "bloc" without detailed preparations.

They said that any such summit meeting with all 20 Arab countries would be preceded by preparatory talks with individual Arab countries.

Conference sources gave several explanations for the efforts of top officials to accentuate the positive. One is the desire of the foreign ministers to close ranks before the coming Soviet-American summit meeting in Moscow. Another is that this meeting brought a whole new European east of characters. Five countries—France, West Germany, Britain, Denmark and Portugal—have changed governments since the December foreign ministers meeting. American officials say they have detected a "better working relationship" with the new French government.

Among top NATO representatives in Europe, there has been increasing concern about Soviet rigidity in East-West negotiations under way in Geneva and Vienna.

In his first speech to a NATO gathering, the new

West German foreign minister, Hans-Dietrich Genscher, was reported to have warned that the Bonn government "does not overlook" the strengthening of armed forces in Eastern Europe.

Genscher also cited Soviet failure to give any ground on three items at preliminary European security conference talks in Geneva — measures to build confidence in the nonaggressive intentions of Warsaw Pact forces "humanitarian" measures to lessen the hardships of divided families and greater exchange of information across the East-West borders.

The message of the Europeans here to President Nixon is that he should not feel in any hurry in Moscow to agree to a general East-West summit meeting until the Soviets have made concessions in those areas.

NATO Secretary General Joseph Lans said it would be "unrealistic to deny thatente is a one-way process serving the exclusive interests of the Soviet Union... I trust that the confidence we have placed in the Soviet spirit of compromise will be justified."

Later in the sessions in Ottawa, Kissinger will meet the new Portuguese foreign minister, Mario Soares. Several officials praised Portugal for ousting its autocratic government and instituting democratic forms of government.

British Foreign Secretary James Callaghan, the president of the NATO Council, said he was pleased "at the decision of the new Portuguese government to restore democratic liberties and human rights to Portugal and to her overseas territories"

KISSINGER AFFIRMS
RESIGNATION STAND

Special to The New York Times

JERUSALEM, June 17 — A week after he threatened to resign unless he was cleared of allegations of impropriety in the wiretapping of Government officials and newsmen, Secretary of State Kissinger appeared back in his customary good humor today.

The first question put to him at a news conference here was how he felt now about resigning.

"I stick by what I said a week ago," he replied, after saying that he would answer that question but no others on the subject. "And now the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is going to look into the matter," he went on. The remark, at the first press conference Mr. Kissinger has held since the threat to quit was made in Salzburg, Austria, was taken as an indication that the committee would back him, and that he would accept such action as sufficient vindication.

In response to another question, the Secretary said he had not noticed that his relations with foreign leaders had been damaged by the wiretapping allegations.

George F. Will

6-18-74

# Congressional Panic Over Kissinger

Things got a bit hectic in World's Greatest Deliberative Body the other day. Senators tumbled over each other, spraining ankles and straining ligaments in their rush to endorse a resolution declaring that Henry Kissinger's "integrity and veracity are above reproach."

Never let it be said that our government is full of Hamlets who allow the native hue of their resolutions to be sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought.

Why, even the Secretary of Commerce, a gentleman named Fred Dent, rather grandly announced that he has "confidence" in Mr. Kissinger's integrity. You ask: "What does the Secretary of Commerce know about the complicated issues involved in the current controversy?" Don't ask.

Ask instead about the significance of the remarkable government-wide reflex to rally 'round Mr. Kissinger.

This reflex involves more than a proper respect for Mr. Kissinger's exemplary patriotism and momentous achievements. It also involves palpable panic, especially in Congress.

Until now the spoor of the Watergate beast has led directly toward Mr. Nixon and those unpleasant friends of his—Messrs. Haldeman, Ehrlichman, Colson, Mitchell, et al. But now there is evidence that the most admired man in America, Mr. Kissinger, has done some dishonorable things, like misleading a Senate committee about his role in a secret and dishonorable wiretapping program.

Until now some people actually have enjoyed Watergate. But now they are faced with the possibility that there may be some evidence damaging to Mr. Kissinger, and suddenly Watergate just isn't fun anymore.

Unfortunately, the charges against Mr. Kissinger are numerous and specific. They cannot be blown away by a Senate "resolution." Too many people —some identified, some identifiable—

By Auth for the Philadelphia Inquirer

dispute Mr. Kissinger's sworn testimony that he did not initiate, and was a reluctant participant in, the wiretapping of his aides.

As is the case with us all, fatigue magnifies Mr. Kissinger's flaws, and even when he is in the pink he does not suffer criticism gladly. He is not used to hearing unpleasant questions. Sycophants on his staff and in the press revolve around him like satellites around a sun.

In Salzburg, at his version of Mr. Nixon's 1962 "last press conference," Mr. Kissinger resembled a duke addressing very minor barons as he decried to the Senate: Affirm my veracity, or I will take my bat and ball and structure of peace and leave town.

His message was not original: *Apres moi le deluge*. The senators touched their forelocks and scrambled to sign an affirming resolution.

Actually, were Congress to follow the evidence about Mr. Kissinger's veracity wherever it leads, crops would still grow and songs would still be written. But the Senate would rather declare Mr. Kissinger "above reproach" before getting bogged down in evidence.

So we are probably in for another despiriting episode of unresolved accusations and suspicions. Just for the record, and before confusion becomes total, let us be clear about what the issue is.

Mr. Kissinger and Special Prosecu-

tor Leon Jaworski think the wiretapping was legal. Perhaps it was. But pending court challenge will decide that. Anyway, the legality of the wiretapping is not the issue.

Mr. Kissinger says that much of the information that is embarrassing and infuriating him is coming from leaks. That is true, but not the issue.

The issue is: Was Mr. Kissinger so ashamed of his role in the wiretapping that he—as we say in Washington these days—"did fail and refuse to answer accurately and fully" questions asked at his Senate confirmation hearings?

The words quoted are those of the charge to which former Attorney General Richard Kleindienst pleaded guilty.

NYTimes c6-17-78

# Nixon to Meet Lisbon Chief
In Azores on Wednesday

By HENRY GINIGER
Special to The New York Times

LISBON, June 16 — President Autónio de Spínola will fly to the Portuguese Azores to meet President Nixon Wednesday during the American leader's stopover on his return to Washington from the Middle East.

Reports of the meeting, the first between the two men, were confirmed today by the United States Embassy, which said that they would confer Wednesday morning. Mr. Nixon is expected to arrive in the Azores Tuesday night and leave for Washington immediately after his talks with the Portuguese President.

This will be General Spínola's first meeting with a foreign chief of state since he assumed the leadership of the new Portuguese government after the military coup of April 25.

## Agreement Has Expired

No formal agenda is believed to have been prepared, but three major problems that General Spínola inherited from the old regime are expected to figure in the talks. These are the status of the American air base at Lajes in the Azores, Portugal's war in her African territories and the continuing Arab oil boycott of Portugal.

The agreement with Portugal giving the United States the right to use air facilities on the island of Terceira expired

in February, and the two countries have been negotiating its renewal. The former Portuguese government had expressed dissatisfaction with the benefits Portugal had derived from the agreement and had even threatened to terminate it. But a new agreement is expected probably with an increase in American aid as the price.

There was a demonstration Friday in Ponta Delgada, on São Miguel Island in the Azores, that had an anti-American character, and leftists here have charged that the Americans were treating their Portuguese employes at the base badly.

The Americans used the base to ferry military supplies to Israel during the Middle East war last October, and this was a major factor in the Arabs' imposition of a total oil boycott on the Portuguese. General Spínola was expected to seek information from Mr. Nixon as to current Arab policy.

Arab hostility toward Portugal is also linked to Portuguese colonial policy in Africa, which the new Government is seeking to change.

General Spínola is expected to seek Mr. Nixon's support for his policy of self-determination for the African territories through referendums that could lead to independence.

4

C

New U.S. Envoy to Cambodia

By DAVID K. SHIPLER
Special to The New York Times

PHNOM PENH, Cambodia, June 15 — With the toughness of a hard-nosed colonel and the finesse of a charming conciliator, the new United States Ambassador to Cambodia, John Gunther Dean, has been charging around the country re-proaching generals, wooing opposition leaders and searching —so far in vain—for some insurgents who are willing to negotiate.

He has lost 15 pounds in the
10 weeks he has been here,
most of them apparently melt-
ing away under the frustration
of trying to whip the Govern-
ment into shape.

The Government of Marshal Lon Nol is widely regarded as corrupt, disorganized and ineffective, and Mr. Dean is a zealous practitioner of pragmatic diplomacy. His aim, according to those who have watched him operate, is to make the Government strong enough to withstand further military and economic pressure from the Communist-led insurgents and thereby force them eventually to the bargaining table.

The energy and bluntness
with which he has pursued this
mission have already made Mr.
Dean's name a household word
in Phnom Penh — at least in
the villas of the generals and
the ministers.

Prods Commanders

He has been known to fly
to besieged Government en-
claves where he prods military
commanders into starting at-
tacks that had not occurred to
them.

He instructs them in the

making an effort to weed out
corruption and eradicate some
of the other ills that Congres-
sional liberals have long pointed
to as reasons why they think
the United States should not

John Gunther Dean

Cleara
Men's Spor
and Shirts
in time for Sum

Short-sleeved shirts for
Sport shirts in polyester
10.00 and 12.00. Machi
front, round necked or b
patterns. S-m-l-xl. Sixth floo
Knit shirts of the latest in

Nuclear Power for Cairo

The nuclear accord between Presidents Nixon and Sadat symbolizes the change that has occurred in the Mideast. A relationship of confidence and cooperation with both sides in the Israel-Arab dispute has been opened up by Secretary of State Kissinger's extraordinary negotiations.

How durable this hopeful situation will be is still a question. The uneasy armistice in the Mideast war is a long way from the full peace settlement that is needed. Desert sands can shift quickly. But nothing is more important at this stage than to consolidate the new relationships through gestures of confidence.

It is in this sense that Mr. Nixon's decision to grant Egypt's request for peaceful nuclear assistance under international safeguards—and, evidently, to offer similar terms to Israel—must be understood. It recalls President Eisenhower's offer of huge nuclear desalination and power plants to the Mideast rivals, in a development plan prepared by the late Lewis Strauss, then chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission.

The current offer to Egypt, which will require negotiation of detailed agreements and an opportunity for Congressional hearings and disapproval, is on a much smaller scale. But it will provide Egypt with its first nuclear power reactors at a time when rising energy costs have made installations of this 600 megawatt size commercially competitive. While the electric power undoubtedly will be useful for Egypt's new economic development program, Israel's access to similar installations will provide the additional benefit of an energy source that is not dependent on Mideast oil.

* * *

The United States in years past has entered into safeguarded agreements for peaceful nuclear assistance with about 35 countries without any indication of evasion. India's recent not-so-peaceful nuclear explosion, which has caused much concern, was made possible by a Canadian-built reactor that was not subject to international safeguards against plutonium diversion. Moreover, Egypt evidently has agreed to renounce "peaceful" nuclear explosions as well as other military uses of American nuclear aid. Nevertheless, it is essential for full confidence in this country that Congressional hearings be held, as the chairman of the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy has already promised.

Answers will be needed to a number of questions. What assurances would the United States have against denunciation of the agreements, once the nuclear power plant is operating and Egypt has acquired enough nuclear know-how to contemplate making a bomb? No one can predict the state of peace in the Mideast a decade from now or what government will be in power in Cairo.

So far, Egypt has acquired only a small research reactor from the Soviet Union that has virtually no plutonium capability. For the United States to withhold power reactors, now that Cairo has decided to move in this direction, would not prevent Egypt from getting them from other sources. United States aid could offer the most effective safeguard against plutonium diversion to nuclear arms.

# Most Israelis Hail Nixon;
Some Cite Watergate Role

NY Times 6-17-74

By JOHN HERBERS

Special to The New York Times

JERUSALEM, June 16 — Israel showered President Nixon with praise and cheers this afternoon when he arrived fresh from conferences with Arab leaders in three countries.

Despite some apprehensions about the new American initiatives for friendship with Israel's enemies, Government leaders made every effort to make the President welcome and the people turned out in large numbers to cheer him.

However, he encountered, here in Israel, the first show of hostility of his Middle Eastern journey — signs, held by some in the crowds, disparaging his role in the Watergate affair.

"You are the first President of the United States to visit the state of Israel," President Ephram Katzir told Mr. Nixon in a ceremony at Tel Aviv airport. "You, personally, Mr. President, have demonstrated in a singular manner your amity and your constant readiness to come to our assistance. We shall never forget that you stood with us in hours of grave perils as well as in days of opportunity and hope."

The President was then driven into Jerusalem past crowds estimated by Israeli officials at more than 100,000, and to conferences with Government officials who were waiting with a long agenda of tough problems they wanted to

take up with the Americans.

Mr. Nixon came here from Damascus, where he announced the resumption of diplomatic relations with Syria, which has been a bitter enemy of Israel.

In response to President Katzir's praise, President Nixon said that, "As I travel to nations that over the past few years have been Israel's traditional adversaries, I have been glad to know that the people of this nation understand, that they appreciate the purpose of that journey. That purpose is the purpose of peace all over the world."

Outside the airport, a crowd of several thousand, mostly youths wearing orange, yellow, blue and red hats, cheered as the limousine carrying the two Presidents approached. The sunroof of the car had been opened so they could stand up and be seen. The motorcade then moved through groves of olive trees and into the city of Lydda where another big crowd was waiting.

They rode for 31 miles, past the Ramle Prison, where Adolf Eichmann was executed, through the valley of Latrun, past a Trappist monastery and lines of curious monks and into the mountains to the outskirts of Jerusalem.

Elaborate preparations had been made for the Nixon visit.

Continued on Page 3, Column I

696 WHITE PLAINS ROAD, SCARSDALE, N.Y. 10583

SUPERB SUMMER
SPORT JACKETS
BY HICKEY FREEMAN

Brighten up your vacation and leisure hours with a sport jacket created by Hickey Freeman craftsmen. We have a vast selection that includes attractive plaids and the solid tones of summer. All in lightweight fabrics that will really let you enjoy those days in the sun.

Sport Jackets (2nd floor)

Open a Tripler Charge
or use the
American Express Card

R. TRIPLER & CO.

Most Israelis Cheer Nixon's Arrival

Continued From Page 1, Col. 7

Extensive security precautions had been taken to a greater degree than for the visit of former Chancellor Willy Brandt of West Germany last year. Streets were blocked for two hours before the arrival, causing huge traffic jams.

Mayor Teddy Kolek had distributed a large stock of American flags, along with a letter to citizens characterizing Mr. Nixon as "a great friend of Israel." Schools were closed for the occasion.

A group calling itself "the Ad Hoc Committee for the Impeachment of Richard Nixon" was denied a request to demonstrate against Mr. Nixon and had to hold its demonstration in a park before the President's arrival.

When the motorcade arrived in Jerusalem, the streets were teeming with people. Apartment houses were draped with American flags. Children waved American and Israeli flags. But for the first time on his trip, there were the kind of signs that Mr. Nixon encounters almost everywhere he goes at home. Samples:

### A Big Hand for Kissinger

"Remove All the Expletives," a reference to his Watergate transcripts; "You Can't Run From Justice," "Welcome President Ford." And "We Are All Jew Boys." This was in reference to reports, which the White House has denied, that Mr. Nixon made disparaging references to Jews in some of the tape recordings.

When the motorcade got to the King David Hotel, a crowd outside cheered the President, but cheered louder for Secretary of State Kissinger, who seemed delighted. He waved and smiled.

Around the hotel, soldiers with guns and searchlights were visible on every roof as Mr. Nixon and Mr. Kissinger moved in to confer with Premier Yitzhak Rabin and other officials.

It was not disclosed what specific subjects were dis-

cussed, other than that Mr. Kissinger briefed the Israeli officials on the Nixon discussions with Arab leaders. Israeli officials were said to be anxious to hear further explanations for Mr. Nixon's reasons for making nuclear power for peaceful uses available to Egypt, and to secure further agreement for military aid. They were also planning to press Mr. Nixon to ask for a higher quota of Jewish emigrants from the Soviet Union when the President meets later this month in Moscow with Leonid E. Brezhnev, the Communist party leader.

### Nixon Visits Mrs. Meir

Mr. Nixon paid a visit to former Premier Golda Meir, along with Mr. Kissinger, United States Ambassador Kenneth B. Keating and Premier Rabin.

Mrs. Meir has not yet moved out of the official premier's residence, a pale yellow stucco structure in a residential second-generation children watched from second-floor windows as the

limousines pulled up. The meeting lasted more than one hour. Tonight Mr. and Mrs. Nixon and members of the presidential party were guests at a state dinner at the Parliament building.

Mr. Kissinger will leave the presidential trip tomorrow to attend the meeting in Ottawa of foreign ministers of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. President Nixon, after a round of further talks and ceremony here, will depart for Jordan, the last stop on his Middle-East trip.

### Possible Portugal Talk

Ronald L. Ziegler, the White House press secretary, said that Mr. Nixon would probably confer with President António de Spinola of Portugal in the Azores, where Mr. Nixon plans to stop overnight Tuesday before returning to Washington. Mr. Ziegler said that General Spinola had requested the meeting.

GIVE SUMMER TO A CHILD.
THE FRESH AIR FUND.

# Brezhnev Voices Optimism
## Over Nixon Summit Talks

WASH. POST
6/17

By Robert G. Kaiser

Washington Post Foreign Service

MOSCOW, June 16—Soviet leader Leonid I. Brezhnev led about 150 million Soviet citizens to the polls today, casting a vote for "the unbreakable bloc of Communists and non-party members," then telling newsmen of his optimism about the upcoming summit meeting with President Nixon.

Brezhnev predicted that he and the President will reach "good new agreements" which "will make people happy both here and in the United States despite the pessimism that has been shown by certain circles there." But he refused to be specific, saying "Mr. Nixon would be angry if I told you in

advance what we will talk about."

In a speech last week, however, Brezhnev said the Soviet Union was prepared to reach an agreement on underground nuclear testing with the United States.

[Brezhnev also touched on the issue of the European Security Conference, according to the Associated Press. The conference, he said, "can't go on and on." He said he was hopeful for a successful conclusion since "the principal questions have already been resolved. Only small secondary things are left and they don't play an important role."

"I've already received new assurances from heads of state

that are of positive tones," Brezhnev said.]

Brezhnev made these remarks in an impromptu conversation with Western newsmen invited to watch him cast his vote. He said the President might visit Yalta or another spot in the Crimea, Minsk, Volgograd or Siberia during a visit which Brezhnev said would last a week, starting June 27.

"What he wants to see, we will show him," Brezhnev said of Mr. Nixon's travels. "I would go to Yalta with pleasure... I think Mr. Nixon will also," Brezhnev said.

A jovial Brezhnev arrived at his polling station—conveniently located in the apartment house where he lives—at 11 o'clock this morning. He told the ladies working at the polling place that "I came home late from work last night, at about 11" and had misplaced his passport—the identity card every Soviet citizen is supposed to carry.

"Let my eyebrows be my documents," he said with a grin, pointing to his bushy brows. "Let's do it on faith." The ladies behind the table readily agreed, and gave him his ballot papers.

This is one of several privileges those in power seem to enjoy in a Soviet election. Western politicians dismayed by the unpredictable quality of an election campaign could take a lesson from the Soviet model, which rules out unpredictability altogether.

One Russian wag recently remarked that his country has taken democracy to its logical conclusion—"One man, one vote, one candidate." There is only one candidate for each place in the Supreme Soviet and the Soviet of Nationalities, the two bodies elected in today's voting.

They comprise the Soviet Union's formal Parliament. They usually meet twice a year for a few days, when they invariably vote unanimously, invariably in support of the

See SOVIET, A3, Col. 1

hard on the White House, which has had mixed feelings about the legal services program anyway. Perhaps, White House aides suggested, the liberal sponsors should take the bill back to conference committee and water it down further, killing the controversial back-up centers which formulate class-action lawsuits for the poor. Well, the senators asked, would that make it veto-proof? Maybe, maybe not.

"The President's position was he would veto anything to the left of the House bill," said James Cavanaugh, associate director of the

Subcommittee has approved a compromise bill, said, "This year, there have been very, very intense negotiations with our subcommittee and the top HUD people. Last year, discussions weren't even possible. They were extremely arrogant."

Ashley said the new measure provides the administration goals of consolidating HUD grant programs and providing local officials with greater control. It also maintains the low-and middle-income housing requirements demanded by congressional Democrats. The administration froze

cut OMB's own appropriation as an object lesson in who has power.

"Everything almost daily is a confrontation," one influential committee member complained. "It comes through in loud, clear tones downtown—projects all over the country, public works, appropriations, the question of vetoes. Ever since Watergate got under way, you could see the wheels slow down and the blocks form for confrontation."

On Capitol Hill, nobody can see any clear pattern to the OMB behavior of rewarding or punishing con-

## Hoover Practices Scored by Saxbe

Associated Press

Attorney General William B. Saxbe said yesterday that the FBI engaged in improper practices as part of a counterintelligence operation approved by the late J. Edgar Hoover.

The former Ohio senator complained of Hoover's one-man control of the FBI and recommended the current director, Clarence M. Kelley, for

his effort to open the agency to public scrutiny.

The Attorney General's remarks came on the NBC radio program "Speaking Freely."

tive measures to stop the violence on campus and the racist activities, and what he considered Communist activities."

Asked if the operation in-

'Vicious Attacks'

WASH. POST

6/17/74

Dr. Henry Kissinger has done more to promote world peace during the past few months than all of the newspapers and newsmagazines of this country have ever done.

Vicious attacks on his character are totally unwarranted in view of the outstanding accomplishments achieved by him, bringing honor to this nation.

Which newspaper editor could have done as well?

RALPH BAILEY.

North Miami, Fla.

LETTERS TO EDITOR

WASH. POST 6/17/74

# Kissinger
## Backed by
### Ruckelshaus

By Bob Kuttner

Washington Post Staff Writer

Former acting FBI Director William D. Ruckelshaus yesterday supported Henry A. Kissinger's account of the role the Secretary of State played in the FBI wiretaps of 17 government officials and newsmen.

Ruckelshaus, who first investigated and confirmed the existence of the taps a year ago, said Kissinger's role "is pretty much as he's described it."

At issue is whether Kissinger misrepresented his involvement in the tapping to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee during hearings last September on his nomination to be Secretary of State. At that time, Kissinger assured the committee that he merely provided the FBI with names of officials with access to the leaked documents.

However, FBI memoranda supplied to the House Judiciary Committee—and also leaked to the press—indicate that Kissinger's office initiated 14 of the 17 taps. It was those leaks and the inference of deception or even perjury that prompted Kissinger's threat last week to resign.

See TAPS, A8, Col 1.

A8

Monday, June 17, 1974

THE WASHINGTON POST

‘Initiate’ Is Key Word

# Ruckelshaus Backs Kissinger Account

TAPS, From A1

Ruckelshaus suggested that the confusion is over the word, 'initiate.'

"In the sense that he supplied the names, he initiated it." Ruckelshaus told interviewers on the program "Face the Nation" (WTOP, CBS). "But his definition of initiation is that it wasn't his idea to tap; he simply complained about the leaks."

Other officials friendly to Kissinger have suggested privately that Hoover's memos identifying Kissinger as instigator of the taps can be explained as a familiar bureaucratic device intended to protect the FBI by placing responsibility elsewhere.

However, Ruckelshaus offered another explanation.

"There was a previously determined program to stop leaks," Ruckelshaus said, adding that the program called for Kissinger's office to provide the names of suspected leakers.

"In the process of supplying those names, it may well have been described in FBI memorandum that this was a request coming from the National Security Council or Mr. Kissinger..."

Ruckelshaus confirmed that he did not interview Kissinger as part of his investigation. And he agreed that "there are

questions" about why some persons with "only a peripheral, if any, relationship to national security" were among those tapped.

On related topics, Ruckelshaus said he believes some of the Watergate sentences imposed after plea bargaining were too light, and that President Nixon has not yet disclosed all pertinent Watergate information.

"My guess is that there will be more surprises," Ruckelshaus added.

Ruckelshaus resigned as deputy attorney general last October over the firing of Watergate Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox.

W. D. RUCKELSHAUS
... sees "more surprises"