# Q&A

Continued from A-1

**Q.** Do you think that Reagan's statement in January, to have a blockade against Cuba to force the Russians withdraw their troops from Afghanistan, was well-advanced?

A. In a primary campaign, many things are said that have dramatic effect.

To propose one specific military move tends to have a sharpness you may not have intended. But the general proposition that it isn't possible to permit unlimited military aggression on one side and no response on the other, that I agree with.

On the particular proposal of blockading Cuba, it would have to be a very serious provocation before we would go to that.

**Q.** Gov. Reagan has proposed both to reduce government spending and increase the strength of our military. Do these plans seem simultaneously viable to you? If so, how?

A. Luckily for this country, I am not an expert on economics. I believe it is a national imperative for us to try to restore the military balance. Any analogy shows us that the Soviet Union has been producing in every category of weapons, more than we have. Inevitably, it will lead to foreign policy consequences. Those foreign policy consequences, as we have seen in the Persian Gulf and elsewhere, will have more serious economic impact on the United States and its allies than any budgetary consequences of an increase in the defense budget.

**Q.** You were national security adviser from 1968-1975, and secretary of state from 1973-1977. Did you notice the decline in U.S. military power then?

A. I was extremely concerned. There were many, many memorandae that pointed that out. You have to remember that almost every new weapons system that now exists was started when I was in office. We consistently asked for more than Congress would support.

**Q.** When do you think the decline in U.S. military power began?

A. The decline in military power began, in some respects, in the '60s, when major decisions were made based on the assumption that the destruction of civilian populations was the primary picture of war.

Under the Johnson period, as a result of the Vietnam war, two things happened; there was a disproportionate amount of the military budget that had to go to the Vietnam war and second, the Congress systematically cut the military budget in order to cause an end to the Vietnam War.

I believe that this administration has accelerated this process by canceling the B-1 (bomber), canceling

the neutron bomb, stretching out the MX, stretching out the cruise missile and either delaying, canceling or stretching out every weapons system it inherited.

**Q.** Do you think the Soviet Union will intervene in Iran?

A. I do not believe they will. I think the events in the Persian Gulf are going very well for them. I think it is quite possible that Iran will be driven over time in a pro-Soviet direction anyway. If it isn't, the Soviets always have the possibility of disintegrating Iran by encouraging the various nationalities like the Baluchis and the Kurds to secede.

The fact that the Soviet Union feels very confident you can see in that they are maintaining excellent relations with Syria, Syria's mortal enemy Iraq, and Iraq's mortal enemy Iran.

Which proves that the countries of the area have come to the conclusion that whether they like the Soviet Union or not — it is the country with the greatest possibilities. The United States has been significantly reduced as the major factor in the area.

**Q.** There have been persistent, but so far unfounded rumors, that the United States Navy prepared to trade military supplies for the U.S. hostages (in Teheran). What would that do to the U.S. commitment to neutrality in the Iran-Iraq conflict?

A. I know some of the families involved. I want the hostages released. I know what these families are going through and I can imagine what the hostages must be going through.

But as I have reflected on the subject, I have become more and more concerned about the basic proposition.

First, I really gag at the proposition that we should pay anything for the release of the hostages.

If we establish the principle that there is a price we pay for their release, what is to prevent others from taking other American hostages, when there are hundreds of thousands of Americans around the world.

Secondly, the decision to give military arms to a foreign country, any foreign country, in the middle of a war, involves the profoundest consideration of national security.

It should be taken on the grounds of the national security of the United States, not on the grounds that they have captured 51 Americans totally illegally.

Third, we have now sent four radar planes to Saudi Arabia. Are we going to wind up arming both sides in the war as a result of American hostages? It is a dangerous course to get ourselves on both sides of the war.

**Q.** If the war between Iraq and Iran continues, what do you think is in the future?

A. I think that there is always a limit to these wars because both sides will run out of supplies.

I think the most likely outcome is a stalemate, interrupted by periodic outbreaks.

Some police officers have character canvass as a "publicity stunt," but they are concentrated in the areas where the disappearing and that officers will be their normal work to canvass.

The search team almost bypassed the skeleton was found Saturday, because locked and fenced in. A 13-year-old boy ers through a break in the fence after s skull, teeth and bones on the ground.

Latonya's parents told police they their daughter missing. A pane of glass moved from the first floor apartment door had been left open.

A neighbor said she saw a man carry the apartment about 4 a.m. but thought it relative.

## Platform damage

KODIAK, Alaska (AP) — Crewmen drilling platform under tow after two the northern Pacific Ocean have report er of more structural damage but under control, the Coast Guard says.

The damage probably would not end or platform unless the weather worsens said Sunday.

The 208-foot platform "Dan Prince" late Thursday when a helicopter pad 10-foot seas and 60-knot winds, slicing t ween the platform and its tug.

The Coast Guard said the tugboat S e-established a towline late Saturday a the 208-foot platform owned by Scou Monrovia, Liberia, towards Honolulu.

Despite 18-foot seas and 30-knot w rom the Coast Guard cutter Boutwe lass survival suits and pumps to the platform Sunday.

Crewmen aboard the Dan Prince r ies.

The Dan Prince was being towed to ion of Ivory Coast from Norton Sour northwest coast, when its towline wa

## Fashion pe or frost

### Proteine® perm, $20

The healthy-hair perm by Helene Cu with special conditioners to protect and leave it with great body. Includes shampoo, cut and styling.

### Frost or highlights, 19.88

Frost your hair with dramatic color s subtle highlights. Our professional s will make your true colors shine. Inc toner and styling.

### Charge up with your JCPenney Visa®

Long hair extra. Appointments not a

JCPenney Beauty Salon features Rec products for home care use to keep your hair in great shape between salon visits

Prices effective for a limited time only.

## THE STYLING SALO

### JCPenney

CUPERTINO, Valiko Fashion Park WESTO Phone: 446-9622 Phone:

EASTRIDGE, San Jose MAYFIELD MALL Phone: 238-0318 Phone: 967-3040

1980 JCPenney Co. Inc.

# Kissinger brings his comeback drive to Cupertino

OCT 17 1980

Diplomat-for-hire Henry Kissinger will continue his comeback campaign on the Peninsula Sunday morning with a lecture at Flint Center in Cupertino.

For those who'll plunk out several bucks to hear the foreign entanglements specialist assess America's woes on several fronts, we suggest a prompt reading of "Through History With Henry A. Kissinger," a piece by William Shawcross in the November issue of Harper's magazine.

Shawcross last year uncorked a

blockbusting book titled "Sideshow," in which he assailed Richard Nixon and Kissinger for colossal deceit in the U.S. bombing of Cambodia during the Vietnam War and for a share of the guilt in Cambodia's genocide since then. His newest salvo also accuses Kissinger of gross deception and glaring omissions in "White House Years," the 1,500-page first installment of Kissinger's memoirs.

Shawcross says Kissinger's thirst for a return to power in a new administration was the driving force behind Gerald Ford's embarrassing attempt

to thwart Ronald Reagan's nomination last summer. When Ford's challenge fizzled, Kissinger tried to ingratiate himself with Reagan's top staffers and has made his availability to a Reagan administration obvious.

Shawcross in the article examines Kissinger's elitist attitude and warns that he does not deserve to be secretary of state again or "to hold any position of public responsibility."

No doubt Kissinger's talk at Flint Center should be lively. The questions-and-answers bit even more so.

~~S. F. Chrismide~~
# Kissinger to Give Up
# Telephone Notes

OCT 1 0 1980

Washington

Former Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger has agreed to turn over to the government transcripts of his telephone conversations made while he headed the State Department, U.S. officials said yesterday.

However, under a compromise agreement with department lawyers, Kissinger will be able to keep under wraps notes that are considered personal.

Kissinger had said he considered the summaries of phone calls, prepared by secretaries who listened in secretly on Kissinger's orders, "his personal working papers." Without deciding that issue, the Supreme Court last March kept them out of the hands of journalists, historians and political scientists.

They had sued under the 1966 Freedom of Information law to try to open the transcripts to the public. But the high court held 5 to 2 that the law did not apply because Kissinger had shifted the summaries to the Library of Congress before they sued.

Lawyers for Kissinger and the State Department met recently to work out the compromise. A review of the papers will be held soon "to return to the department whatever we decide is essential to recover," said an official who wished not to be identified.

Kissinger served as secretary of state from 1973 to January of 1979.

Associated Press

Associated Press

Henry Kissinger

Kissinger says U.S.
would back China

NEW YORK (AP) — The United
States would have taken military
action in 1971 if the Soviet Union
had attacked China during the
India-Pakistan war, former Secre-
tary of State Henry Kissinger says
in his soon-to-be-published mem-
oirs.

He does not say how far the
Nixon administration would have
gone in such action, but it would
have been on behalf of a country
with which the United States had
only recently renewed contacts and
still had no diplomatic relations.

Nixon publicly ordered a Pacific-
based carrier task force into the
Bay of Bengal during the war, and
Kissinger said he also quietly
warned Moscow that Soviet-
American relations were at stake.

"He (Nixon) decided, and I fully
agreed, that if the Soviet Union
threatened China, we would not
stand idly by," Kissinger said in an
excerpt of the memoirs, titled
"White House Years," printed in
this week's issue of Time maga-
zine.

The situation developed after
Nixon's November 1971 meeting in
Washington with India's Prime
Minister Indira Gandhi, which Kis-
singer called Nixon's "most unfor-
tunate" meeting with any foreign
leader.

Nixon considered Mrs. Gandhi
"a cold-blooded practitioner of
power politics," according to Kiss-
singer.