HENRY A. KISSINGER

March 16, 1995

Dear Mr. Lambert:

Thank you for thinking of me for your VE Day issue of the
Financial Times. Although I hold the Financial Times in
high regard and consider this to be a worthwhile and
valuable project, I will be unable to do an article for you at
this time. Unfortunately, my schedule in the coming months
does not allow me sufficient time to commit to any
additional projects.

With every good wish,

Best regards,

Mr. Richard Lambert
Editor
Financial Times
Number One
Southward Bridge
London WE1 9HL

International Herald Tribune, March 1, 1995

# Help the Russian Military to Play Its Stabilizing Role

By Benjamin S. Lambeth

SANTA MONICA, California — Russia's armed forces, only a few years ago the vaunted Soviet juggernaut, today are in a shambles. The failure ofCommunism and the collapse of the Soviet state have left the high command with immense problems. Even before the army's misadventure in Chechnya, signs of privation were rampant.

Yet the military remains a responsible and stabilizing force in society. While in disarray at all levels, it continues to be pivotal in the democratic reform process.

Despite ups and downs in Washington's political dealings with Moscow, the relationship between the Russian and American militaries has generally re-

> The military is the one Russian institution that can make or break a cooperative security relationship with the West.

mained cordial and businesslike since the Soviet Union collapsed. At the moment, that relationship is troubled. Nonetheless, the U.S. military should keep nurturing it. Because of its monopoly on arms, the military is the one Russian institution that can make or break a cooperative security relationship with the West.

In grappling with its economic crisis, the government of President Boris Yeltsin has dramatically reduced military spending, leading to a financing crisis that has brought modernization to a near halt.

The air force and the air defense forces together typically bought about 450 new fighters a year in the mid-1980s. They acquired only 23 in 1993 and 1994 combined — not even enough to replace aircraft lost in routine accidents.

Training has been hit hard. The Finance

Ministry has repeatedly failed to provide money even for minimum fuel quotas. As a result, fighter pilots now log an average of 25 flying hours a year, as against 180 to 220 hours in Western air forces.

There have been no ground force maneuvers at the division level or above since 1992. Not even the best army divisions are fully manned and equipped.

The surface navy rarely puts to sea because of insufficient rubles for fuel.

The few training exercises conducted in 1993 by all services revealed poor command preparations and an alarming buildup of unserviceable equipment.

Disruptions like these have produced an appalling quality of life in the ranks. Officers at all levels are paid a pittance by civilian standards, a problem worsened by the rocketing inflation since Mr. Yeltsin's removal of price controls in 1992. Many officers outside Moscow have to work off-duty as farmhands to make ends meet. Defense Minister Pavel Grachev has described his military as "hungry, barefoot and underfinanced."

All this goes far toward explaining the sorry performance of Russia's troops in Chechnya: a ragtag band of hastily assembled conscripts not resourceful enough to evade the draft, led by underequipped, undertrained and demoralized officers who admitted that they did not know why they were there and resented the burden that Mr. Yeltsin imposed on them.

No one should imagine that Russia's military is looking for trouble. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, military leaders have insisted unwaveringly that their sole mission is to defend Russia against external aggression, not to influence political maneuvering or police domestic unrest. This bears witness to their enduring professionalism.

With reasonably good grace, military leaders acceded to the collapse of the Warsaw Pact and the reunification of Germany, with its incorporation into NATO. They have completed one of the most extensive withdrawals in modern times — their voluntary and, in the view of many officers, humiliating return home after three generations of forward deployment in Eastern Europe and the Baltic states.

And they agreed to join the United States and Britain in no longer aiming ballistic missiles at one another.

In light of these encouraging signs, the Pentagon should continue pursuing close cooperative ties with the Russian military, despite current misgivings in some parts of the Russian high command.

A strong, composed and respected Russian military is far more likely to be a constructive player in the difficult reform process than an isolated, demoralized and angry one. Moreover, a healthy military will be more inclined to focus on legitimate regional security concerns, such as the prospect of nuclear misbehavior by North Korea or some undeterable pariah state, than to mimic the familiar Soviet pattern of engaging in far-flung adventures.

Fortunately, much has already been accomplished, without fanfare. U.S. and Russian fighter and bomber units have made several successful exchange visits, with more to come. In June, Russian and American sailors and marines joined in a mock amphibious operation northeast of Vladivostok to help victims of a hypothetical natural disaster.

After one political postponement, a joint exercise was held in September at Totskoye, on the steppes a thousand kilometers southeast of Moscow.

But recently military contacts have become strained. Even before Chechnya reached full boil in December, the enthusiasm of many military leaders for joint

activities had begun to wane. This partly reflected a resurgence of old suspicions.

Many officers increasingly resent what they imagine to be a hidden American intention to relegate Russia to permanent second-class status while the United States secures its place as the sole superpower. As long as such suspicion persists, no Russian military leaders will stick their necks out, least of all by going beyond polite attention to proposals for increased dealings with the Pentagon.

Turbulence in the upper reaches of the high command has made it easier for Russia's security services to revert to deplorable habits. The head of military intelligence, Colonel General Fyodor Lalygin, has never favored closer ties between the United States and Russia.

After the joint peacekeeping exercise in Totskoye, he grumbled that a third of the 250 American troops involved were in the pay of intelligence and that the 27 U.S. aircraft flown to Russia for the exercise had been packed with electronic surveillance equipment. Those fabrications cast a wet blanket on the mutual goodwill generated by the exercise.

In working with the Russian military, the United States needs to keep its expectations from swinging from excessive hope to bottomless pessimism. If America gives up now and writes Russia off as incorrigible, it could contribute to a self-fulfilling prophecy.

As stressful as the superpower competition was during the Cold War, it was at least stable and predictable. This would not be the case with a fractious and xenophobic post-Soviet Russia armed with 27,000 nuclear weapons and an attitude.

The writer is a specialist in Russian military affairs at the Rand Corporation. This comment in The New York Times was adapted from a longer article in the March-April issue of Foreign Affairs.

HENRY A. KISSINGER

January 26, 1995

Dear Pete:

I am writing to introduce a friend of long
standing, Count Otto Lambsdorff, who mentioned
to me recently his interest in meeting with you
and who has plans to be in California on
February 23rd and 24th. Otto has been a member
of the Bundestag for over twenty years, during
which time he has served as Minister for
Economics (1977-1984) and Chairman of the Free
Democratic Party (1991-1993), and has been
European Chairman of the Trilateral Commission
since 1991. He is one of the most influential
German political figures, and I think you
would enjoy and benefit from making his
acquaintance.

The German consulate in San Francisco will be
contacting your office on Otto's behalf
regarding the possibility of an appointment
and, schedule permitting, I very much hope that
you can arrange some time for him.

With my thanks and all good wishes,

The Honorable
Pete Wilson
Office of the Governor
State Capitol
Sacramento, California 95814

SUITE 1021 • 1800 K STREET, N. W. • WASHINGTON, D. C. 20006 • (202) 872-0300
TELEFAX (212) 753-7248

OTTO GRAF LAMBSDORFF
ALEXANDRA GRÄFIN LAMBSDORFF
BITTEN

ZU EINER SOIREE

AM SAMSTAG, DEM 9. SEPTEMBER 1995

UM 18.30 UHR

IN DIE REDOUTE IN BONN-BAD GODESBERG

KURFÜRSTENALLEE 1.

ZU BEGINN DES ABENDS WERDEN WIR UNS
MIT CHRISTOPHER TAINTON
AUF EINE MUSIKALISCHE REISE BEGEBEN,
DANACH WIRD ES EIN ESSEN GEBEN,
ANSCHLIESSEND WIRD GETANZT.

U.A.W.G. BIS ZUM
JOHANNITERSTR. 7
53113 BONN
TEL. (02 28) 23 60 21
FAX (02 28) 23 60 90

SMOKING
WAGEN 2.00 UHR

MAY 23 1995

Lawyers For Children

Zoë Baird, Chairman

151 Farmington Avenue
Hartford, Connecticut 06156

May 19, 1995

Dr. Henry Kissinger
Kissinger Associates
350 Park Avenue
26th Floor
New York, NY 10022-6022

Dear Henry:

It would give me great pleasure if you could join me and Attorney General Janet Reno in the Great Hall of the United States Department of Justice in Washington, D.C. on June 7th at 11:00 a.m. to launch a national program committed to reaching out to children who are struggling with violence...as victims and as potentially serious perpetrators.

The program, Lawyers for Children, has two components. It trains lawyers to represent neglected and abused children in court, focusing on the psychosocial as well as legal needs of these children. The Yale Child Study Center has joined with Lawyers for Children to provide training and ongoing support to this part of the program.

The second element of Lawyers for Children provides training and support for school-based mediation programs. These programs develop student mediators to respond to a wide range of conflicts, ranging from acting out in the classroom to schoolyard fights, as an alternative to discipline and often suspension. Over 11,000 training programs have been requested by middle schools across the country. The training program has been endorsed by the National School Boards Association and received the Outstanding Achievement Award from the Center for Public Resources. Lawyers for Children also provides ongoing support to some middle and high school-based mediation programs, where our lawyers train students directly to mediate the conflicts that arise in the school.

The initial Lawyers for Children pilot projects have been established in Hartford, Connecticut (the flagship and most developed pilot), Washington, D.C. and Miami, Florida. All our lawyers work on a pro bono basis.

(203) 273-7311 Telephone
(203) 549-6755 Fax

Dr. Henry Kissinger

May 19, 1995

Page 2

On June 7th, we will move our fledgling organization forward as a national program which will eventually consist of satellites in corporate law departments, law firms, and bar associations across the country. Attorney General Reno will address our group and share her perspective on the needs of these children and how we might help address them. We expect press attendance at the event.

I hope to see you on June 7th. Please call (203) 273-7311 to let me know whether you are able to join us.

Best regards,

HENRY A. KISSINGER

February 22, 1995

Dear Harry:

I am sorry that you won't be able to visit Nancy and me in
Connecticut over the June 24-25 weekend but hope that the week-
end of June 3-4 might better suit your schedule. We are eager
to see you.

I myself will be in Hong Kong at the end of June for a meeting
of the International Councillors of the Center for Strategic
and International Studies and would be deeply honored if you
could make informal remarks on June 29 to keynote the meeting.

I have chaired this group of international business leaders for
more than fifteen years. We meet twice a year for off-the-
record strategic assessments of international developments. We
will be hosted in Hong Kong by Councillors C.H. Tung and Richard
Li, and I take the liberty of enclosing a list of the group's
members.

You are a unique intellectual and political resource on the
issue of "Strategic Change in Asia" which will be the theme of
our upcoming meeting. Naturally we will make any adjustment in
our program needed to accomodate your busy schedule, though we
hope to be able to feature you as the dinner speaker on June 29.

The Honorable Lee Kuan Yew
Senior Minister
Office of the Prime Minister
Istana Annex
Istana, Singapore 0922

TWENTY-SIXTH FLOOR • 350 PARK AVENUE • NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10022 • (212) 759-7919

Senior Minister
Singapore

28 February 1995

MAR - 9 1995

Dear Henry

Thank you for your letter February 22.

I had hoped to make New York in early June 1995. But my schedule will now keep me in Europe and I will not be able to make June 3-4. Nor can I make Hong Kong on June 29.

I have always marvelled at the ease which you travel across time zones without showing any fatigue. I suffer from jet lag. So I bunch up my appointments to stay in the same time zone for one or two weeks at a time.

Look forward to meeting you again either in America or in the Far East. So much has changed in the world. I enjoy reading the pieces your secretary sends to me from time to time. The world is in a period of flux, which a strong US leadership can shape to advantage. Perhaps the next two years of the Clinton presidency will be better than the first two.

Best wishes,

Dr Henry Kissinger
Twenty-Sixth Floor
350 Park Avenue
New York
New York 10022

The New York Times

229 WEST 43 STREET
NEW YORK, N.Y. 10036

JOSEPH LELYVELD
Executive Editor

FEB - 1 1995

January 27, 1995

Dr. Henry A. Kissinger
350 Park Avenue - 26th Floor
New York, N.Y. 10022

Dear Dr. Kissinger,

Punch forwarded your letter on the Clough
review of Peter Rodman's book to me and I'm taking
the liberty of replying to you on his behalf.

I don't know the reviewer and I haven't read
the book so I'm at a bit of a disadvantage. But a
fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations is not
obviously a far-out or bizarre choice for such an
assignment. Nor would any assigning editor neces-
sarily feel obliged to seek a review from someone
certain to agree with the viewpoint of the author.
Maybe there is something about Clough that I don't
know but on rereading the review, I don't find it
to be nearly as ideological or passionate or given
to lambasting as you did. It's not perhaps a
memorable review--either as a piece of writing or
as an act of intellectual engagement with the
book--but I also find it hard to see it, as you
did, as an Op-Ed piece.

We go to great lengths to be fair in our as-
signments but, obviously, once those assignments
are made, we are pretty much stuck with the
reviewer's judgment, unless we determine that it
was intellectually dishonest or motivated by mean-
spirited personal concerns. In this case, I'm
satisfied that no one on the Book Review was pur-
suing any agenda, politically correct or other-
wise, in assigning the review to Michael Clough.

CARL LEVIN
MICHIGAN

FEB 2 1 1995

United States Senate

WASHINGTON, DC 20510-2202

February 13, 1995

Honorable Henry Kissinger
Kissinger and Associates, Inc.
350 Park Ave.
New York, New York 10022

Dear Henry:

Thanks for coming to testify before the Armed Services
Committee. I enjoyed hearing your thoughts. You emphasized the
need for bipartisanship in foreign policy, and it is on this
subject that I am writing you.

On the issue of the agreed framework with North Korea, I
believe that some Republicans are attacking the President and the
agreement for political reasons, refusing to give any credit to
an agreement that has given us a realistic hope of a North Korea
without nuclear weapons, and focusing on what the President "gave
up" in the agreement. Here is what we gained in it:

1) An immediate and verified freeze of the North Korean nuclear program (already accomplished), including:

* Shut down of the 5MWe reactor

* Halted construction of the two new reactors

* Plutonium reprocessing facility sealed

* Spent fuel rods stored and not reprocessed

* IAEA personnel in place on-site to verify and monitor

* U.S. personnel permitted to inspect the spent fuel rods and to help establish safe, stable and secure storage (precludes reprocessing)

The spent fuel rods, now under safeguards, contain enough
plutonium for five or six nuclear weapons. (The unaccounted-for
past material contains from 0-2 weapons' worth.)

If the agreement is fully implemented, we would get in
addition:

2) IAEA access to the two suspect waste sites at Yongbyon, and a requirement for full IAEA satisfaction that all past plutonium separation and materials have been accounted for and are placed under IAEA safeguards. Although you said we had acquiesced to North Korea's past nuclear activities, and any consequent weapons produced, the U.S. will not deliver the nuclear components for either reactor unless and until the IAEA is fully satisfied that North Korea's past nuclear activities have been resolved.

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER

Honorable Henry Kissinger

February 13, 1995
Page 2

Although rarely mentioned, it is possible that North Korea produced too little plutonium in the past to fabricate even one nuclear weapon. The evidence at the waste sites cannot be changed before the IAEA conducts inspections. In any event, all plutonium produced previously would be placed under IAEA safeguards (at a minimum), and might be removed from North Korea -- as will be the case with the spent fuel rods, consistent with the North-South Denuclearization Agreement.

3) North Korea will dismantle its three nuclear reactors and its plutonium reprocessing facilities, thus giving up its capability to reprocess plutonium that would be contained in the spent fuel that will be produced by the new Light Water Reactors (LWRs). Also, the LWR technology will produce spent fuel that is incompatible with the current North Korean reprocessing technology and facilities. By accepting the LWRs, North Korea also accepts dependence on U.S./allies as the only source of fuel for the LWRs.

4) If North Korea fails to comply with its obligations under the agreed framework, the U.S. and its partners (South Korea and Japan) will cease our end of the agreement. Under such circumstances, North Korea will not get working nuclear reactors or nuclear components, and will lose the benefits of the agreed framework. We gain leverage as the agreement unfolds because North Korea has greater incentives to continue compliance.

It should also be noted that North Korea was on the verge of re-fueling its 5MWe reactor last summer and also of reprocessing the spent fuel that had been discharged from that reactor. In addition, its two larger reactors could have been producing very large quantities of plutonium, and the reprocessing facility was being expanded to handle the larger quantities of plutonium from those reactors. Absent this agreement, North Korea could have produced enough plutonium for more than a dozen nuclear bombs every year. This is in contrast to the previously produced plutonium that would be sufficient for 0-2 weapons.

We gave up a "confrontational" approach -- sanctions -- that had spotty South Korean support, at best. If sanctions had been implemented at the U.N., we could not have achieved the same results as the agreed framework produced. The best outcome to be hoped for would have been compliance with the NPT, which would have left North Korea's nuclear weapons infrastructure intact, likewise its capability to produce large quantities of plutonium.

Moreover, pursuing sanctions could have led to a bloody conflagration. That is one reason why Gens. Shalikashvili and Luck support the framework agreement.

Honorable Henry Kissinger

February 13, 1995

So that's why I write this heartfelt letter to you. That is
why I believe we need to accentuate the positive aspects of the
agreement: as you said at the hearing, if the agreement is fully
implemented it will be a plus for our security. I think it is
important that people appreciate that view.

But when the negative is emphasized (that the past won't be
resolved for five years) the President is denied the bipartisan
support he should have when he's at least modestly successful in
foreign and security policy initiatives.

Again, thanks for testifying before the Committee and for
your consideration of these comments.

HENRY A. KISSINGER

January 9, 1995

Dear Tony:

I understand from Jerry Bremer that Herbert Levin is being considered for membership in the Council, and I would like to register my enthusiastic support for his election.

Herb is a widely respected authority on Asian issues whom I have known for many years. In October 1994, Cy Vance and I appointed him to the position of Executive Director of the America-China Society, an organization we jointly Chair. His accomplishments in the few short months he has held the position have been impressive; among them is the organization of a high-level conference in Beijing this spring with the China Society for Strategic and Management Research.

Herb was a career Foreign Service officer, serving with distinction in senior positions in Asia, Africa and at the United Nations. After retiring from the diplomatic service in 1991, he spent three years as Special Advisor to United Nations Under-Secretary General Ji Chaozhu prior to joining the America-China Society.

Herb would be an interesting and productive member of the Council, and I hope he will be invited to join.

Mr. Kempton Dunn
Director, Membership Affairs
Council on Foreign Relations
58 East 68th Street
New York, NY 10021

Drew Lewis

May 1, 1995

MAY 0 3 1995

The Honorable Henry A. Kissinger
Kissinger Associates
350 Park Avenue
26th Floor
New York, NY 10022

Dear Henry:

Last November the American public voted for sweeping change in the Congress by electing a decidedly more pro-business, pro-jobs majority in both the Senate and the House. We are on the right track, but our job is far from over. We now need to work together to elect a pro-business, pro-jobs President. That President should be Senator Bob Dole.

Bob Dole has spent a lifetime in the service of his country. As you know, he is a decorated World War II veteran. He has served the state of Kansas in both houses of Congress. Today, he is serving tirelessly as the Majority Leader of the United States Senate.

No other candidate combines Bob's leadership, commitment to principle, and experience. It's not enough to have a philosophical commitment to Republican principles -- we need someone with the experience and courage to deliver the agenda -- at home and abroad.

Bob Dole has vision for America. He will work hard to maintain a strong national defense, to balance the ever-growing federal budget, to reduce the role of government in our daily lives, and to cut taxes so more money can be invested into jobs and savings.

I have agreed to serve on the National Finance Committee for Bob Dole because I support his vision for our future. I am asking you to join me in providing the financial support he needs to run a successful campaign.

The Dole for President campaign can accept personal contributions up to $1,000 per individual ($2,000 per couple) or up to $5,000 from political action committees. I have included a contributor card for you to enclose with your contribution and a self-addressed envelope.

We have a tremendous opportunity to put our country on the right track. I encourage you to board the train before it leaves the station!

Sincerely,

Enclosure

P.O. Box 70 • Lederach, Pennsylvania 19450

Union Pacific
Corporation

Drew Lewis

August 16, 1995

Henry,

Thanks so much for your kind words.

OFFICE OF
HENRY A. KISSINGER

By Facsimile

September 7, 1995

Dear Mr. Lewis:

Because Dr. Kissinger is in Buenos Aires, he asked me to get in touch with you on his behalf.

This morning he received a request for help from the Brazilian Embassy in Washington. Ambassador Flecha de Lima had a stroke a couple of weeks ago and is now partially paralyzed. The Embassy has been trying desperately to rent from the Ford Motor Company one of their vans that are specially equipped for the handicapped to help him through his rehabilitation.

The Embassy has been in contact with a Mr. William Kelly, VP for Government Affairs and has learned that through the normal channels it could take several months to obtain such a van.

Dr. Kissinger suggested I contact you to see if there is any way you could help the Embassy to get one sooner.

The only other information I have is that the van would be obtained through the EKA Division of Ford and would be made available through Kuhn Ford in Annapolis.

I know Dr. Kissinger will be grateful for anything you can do, because the Ambassador is a good friend.

Periscope '95

WANDERING DI

**Kissinger me you fool:** Between revealing that she had strayed (because 'there were three of us in this marriage, so it was a bit crowded,' she told the BBC) and ranging far and wide as an angel of mercy, the Princess of Wales more than ensured her coronation as 'queen of people's hearts.'

POWELL

## Thanks But No Thanks

**B**REATHLESSLY AWAITED and instantly deflated—on Nov. 8, in a masterful press conference by the uncandidate himself—Gen. Colin Powell's presidential trial balloon was the biggest puff of political hot air of 1995. Powell's decision not to run

crushed the hopes of millions of voters and decisively changed the odds for '96. Bob Dole led Powell by only 8 points—and Bill Clinton *trailed* him by 20 points—just before Powell's an-

nouncement. What does it prove? That in America, the voters want Anybody But— and that a black man of modest origins can collect a $6 million advance for his life story ("My American Journey") and go back to tinkering on old cars.

*Dream a little dream of me: Powell*

## MEDI
### DEC 29 1995
### Mergers: Mine Is Bigger Than Yours

**N**BC AND MICROSOFT. Time Warner and CNN. CBS and Westinghouse. ABC and Mickey. No doubt about it: 1995 was the Year of the Amazing Media Deal. Walt Disney set off a chain reaction last summer when it paid $19 billion for Capital Cities/ABC, creating the world's largest entertainment company. Then came the $7.5 billion merger between Time Warner and Turner Broadcasting, owners of CNN. Voilà, an even bigger media behemoth. Now comes Microsoft and NBC, teaming up before Christmas in a half-a-billion-dollar venture to launch a 24-hour news service via cable and the Internet. The goal: to create nothing less than a "virtual"

new network that can stick it to Time Warner and Ted. Small wonder, with all the high hopes and hoopla, that hardly anyone remembers dull-as-dishwater Westinghouse's $5.5 billion takeover of floundering CBS. Not to mention that hardy Hollywood perennial, MCA, parent of Universal Studios, picked up for $5.6 billion by booze titan Seagram. Behind the merger mania: a wistful search for "synergy" in the dawning digital age, at least officially. Skeptics suspect another motive: big personal payoffs for the dealmakers.

Break the bank: Leeson

SCANDALS

## Blowing a Billion

**H**OW DO YOU BLOW $1 BILLION? With that much money you could buy every jewel in Tiffany's, collect a small fleet of 747s... or bankrupt a venerable bank. That's what Nicholas Leeson apparently did. The 28-year-old trader for British investment house Barings PLC, in Singapore, staked more than $1 billion of the company's money last winter on Japanese derivatives—and got tsunamied. For weeks, he had tried to recoup his mounting loss with double-or-nothing bets and doctored bookkeeping. He was arrested in Frankfurt, allegedly on his way to London to prove his bosses' complicity. Germany extradited him last month to Singapore, where he was sentenced to 6½ years in prison. Leeson is appealing.

CHINA

## Cracking Down on Dissent

**T**O INSULT SOMEONE IN Chinese, call them a turtle's egg. That's what China's leaders seemed to be calling the rest of the world when they recently sentenced Wei Jingsheng, the country's best-known democratic dissident, to 14 years in prison. Only intense pressure from the West got Wei out of prison last time. But a powerful struggle among the country's leaders has now made their rhetoric decidedly more nationalistic. A government statement after Wei's conviction claims that he "and the enemy force overseas echo each other and try to create publicity to over throw" the communist government. Hardly words of compromise.

TOP TO BOTTOM: THE STRAITS TIMES—SIPA, JOHN STILLWELL—AP, ILLUSTRATION BY CHARLES BURNS, MINGASSON—CAMMA-LIAISON