-2-

HARRY S. TRUMAN, Toast at the Dinner in Honor of the
Shah of Iran, November 16, 1949 (excerpt):

WE ARE very happy this evening to be hosts to His Majesty the Shahinshah of Iran—a wonderful country historically, and a wonderful country in the modern sense. That country was our ally in the late world war. Had not Iran opened its gates and given us the opportunity to assist the Russians at the proper time, there is not a doubt in the world but what the whole burden of World War II would have eventually been on the United States of America.

We are very grateful for that assistance
which your great country furnished us at
that time.

HARRY S. TRUMAN, Toast at a Dinner Given in His Honor
by the Shah of Iran, November 18, 1949:

Your Majesty, distinguished guests:

I appreciate most highly the kind remarks which Your Majesty has just made. I sincerely hope that I deserve them, and I sincerely hope that our mutual interests and our friendship will continue in the future, as it has in the past.

I am interested in history. I am interested
in the fact that your great country was the
fountain of Western civilization. It was the
great Persian Empire that gave us the funda-
mentals of our laws and our constitution
today. The fundamentals of the Old Testa-
ment laws came through the ancestors of
Your Majesty, the Shahinshah of Iran, who
is here tonight.

It was my privilege and pleasure to meet
him when he arrived at the airport here in
Washington, and I was highly impressed
with his earnestness and sincerity in the wel-
fare of his people. He has those qualifica-
tions which the great masters and rulers of
his land before him impressed upon the
people of the Middle East.

We were discussing the history of Persia
today in the office, on a visit which he paid to
me to discuss some of the things in which we
are mutually interested. I will say this, that

the Shah was somewhat surprised when he
found that some of us here in this country
were familiar with the great of his own great
land, and I am sincerely hoping that he will
have a most pleasant visit in these United
States, the youngest of the great republics in
the world.

And I sincerely hope that we can be of
mutual help to each other. I am sure that if
there is anything that any of us can do to
make his visit pleasant, and to furnish him
with information that will be profitable to
his great country, all of us will cooperate in
giving him that information, and in making
his visit as pleasant as it is possible for us—
a young and new republic, compared with
the greatness of his own great country; and
to do something, we hope, that will make
that right flank—about which we talked
today—as strong as we hope the left flank
and the center will be. Thank you very
much.

May I offer a toast to His Majesty, the
Shahinshah of Iran.

NOTE: The President proposed the toast at a dinner given by the Shah of Iran at the Shoreham Hotel in Washington. The text of the Shah's remarks was not released by the White House.

-3-

DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER, Exchange of letters with the Shah of Iran Concerning the Settlement of the Oil Problem, August 5, 1954:

[Released August 5, 1954. Dated August 4, 1954]

Your Imperial Majesty:

The important news that your Government, in negotiation with the British, French, Dutch and United States oil companies, has reached, in principle, a fair and equitable settlement to the difficult oil problem is indeed gratifying.

Your Majesty must take great satisfaction at the success of this significant phase in the negotiations to which you personally have made a valuable contribution. I am confident that implementation of this agreement, under Your Majesty's leadership, will mark the beginning of a new era of economic progress and stability for your country.

Like myself, all Americans have a deep concern for the well-being of Iran. With them I have watched closely your courageous efforts, your steadfastness over the past difficult years, and with them I too have hoped that you might achieve the goals you so earnestly desire. The attainment of an oil settlement along the lines which have been announced should be a significant step in the direction of the realization of your aspirations for your people.

There is concrete evidence of the friendship that exists between our two countries and of our desire that Iran prosper independently in the family of free nations. We have endeavored to be helpful in the form of economic and technical assistance and we are happy to have helped in finding a solution to the oil problem.

I can assure Your Majesty of the continued friendly interest of the United States in the welfare and progress of Iran, and of the admiration of the American people for your enlightened leadership.

With sincere best wishes for the health and happiness of Your Majesty and the people of Iran,

Sincerely,

DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER

-4-

DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER, Radio and Television Address to the American People on the Need for Mutual Security in Waging the Peace, May 21, 1957 (excerpt):

There remains—in addition to continuing defense and economic aid—a final aspect to our mutual security programs. This entails assistance to meet various special needs, including sudden crises against which prior planning is impossible. Such crises generally demand the swiftest action.

We have seen several such examples in recent years.

In the Middle East, the freedom of Iran only 4 years ago was threatened by the rule of a Government inclined toward Communism. Under the courageous leadership of the Shah, the people of Iran met that danger. In their effort to restore economic stability, they received indispensable help from us. Iran remains free. And its freedom continues to prove of vital importance to our own freedom.

DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER, Remarks Upon Arrival at Mehrabad Airport, Tehran, December 14, 1959:

Your Majesty, Ladies and Gentlemen:

Your Majesty, before I proceed further, may I express my gratitude for the warmth and generosity of the sentiments you have expressed toward my country and toward me personally. I am truly grateful.

This morning, as I set foot on the soil of Iran, I realize a long-held ambition, to see something of this historic land and a courageous people. I have wanted also to return the visit of Your Majesty to my own country, so that here on this spot we may renew our association and friendship.

In my boyhood, ancient Persia, its kings and their adventures, the nation's marvels of building, its religion, made up a fascinating realm of wonder and romance for a high school student who lived on the Plains of Kansas many thousands of miles away, and half a century ago.

Years later, as a soldier, as a University President, and then President of the United States, Iran became for me one of the most important nations of the world. Three times in the past decade I have had long and searching talks with His Majesty the Shahinshah. He concentrates, in his plans and dreams for Iran, the hopes and aspirations of his people. From him I learned more vividly than from books and papers the present greatness of his country's spirit.

I learned, too, its problems, its strengths, its advances, its vital role in the defense of the free world, and the golden future that is assured Iran and its people in a world of peace with justice.

Now I am here—bringing you from the American people their salute to your courage, their congratulations on their achievements, their best wishes for growth in the years ahead, their pledge of friendship for you and your people.

-5-

DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER, Address to the Members of the Parliament of Iran, Tehran, December 14, 1959 (excerpt):

Mr. Prime Minister, Mr. President, Mr. Speaker, Members of the Senate, Members of the Majlis:

The honor you do me with this reception in your handsome new Senate building is a clear indication of the high mutual regard which the Iranian and American peoples have for each other.

Personally, I am deeply touched by your welcome.

We know that people, by meeting together, even if for a limited time, can strengthen their mutual understanding. To increase this mutual understanding has been one of the purposes of my trip to Iran; as it has been to the other countries in which I have stopped along the way.

My conversation this morning with His Imperial Majesty, this con-vocation, my knowledge of the state of relations between our two coun-tries—and indeed, the cordial warmth of the reception that I received upon the streets of your beautiful city—have all been heartening assur-ances that our two countries stand side by side. This visit reinforces my conviction that we stand together. We see eye to eye when it comes to the fundamentals which govern the relations between men and between nations.

JOHN F. KENNEDY, Remarks of Welcome to the Shah and the Empress of Iran at the Washington National Air-Port, April 11, 1962:

Your Majesties:

I speak on behalf of all of my fellow Americans in welcoming you to the United States. We regard your visit here as most valuable to our country, and I hope the cause of freedom and peace.

I have said on other occasions, Your Majesty, that I thought the strongest force in the world today was the desire for na-tional independence, reaching well beyond any ideology or really any national power.

I do not think the history of any country proves that more clearly than the history of Iran. All of us are familiar with the cen-turies long struggle, beginning in the cen-turies before the birth of Christ, of the people of Persia to maintain their national sovereignty. Occupying as you do in Iran a most important strategic area, surrounded as you are by vital and powerful people, your country has been able to maintain its na-tional independence century after century, until we come to the present date where under great challenges you, Your Majesty, lead that historic fight.

We look, in welcoming you here, not only to the past but also to the future—your great desire, evidenced by the work that you have so intensively carried out, to make a better life for your people, to permit them to share in a more fruitful existence, to permit them to be free. And therefore, Your Majesty, on your shoulders hang heavy burdens and heavy responsibilities.

We are glad that you have come halfway around the world, and that from your ancient country you come to this young country in the New World. The interest of both of us is the same: to maintain our freedom, to maintain the peace, and to provide a better life for our people. That is the purpose of your visit, Your Majesty, as to how we can jointly concert that effort.

And we are particularly glad to welcome to this country, I believe for the first time, your wife—whom we are particularly glad to have here on this occasion.

This is one of our wonderful spring days, for which we are justly celebrated, and we are glad to wish you and send to you the greetings of the city and the country.

-7-

JOHN F. KENNEDY, Joint Statement Following Discussions with the Shah of Iran, April 13, 1962:

THE PRESIDENT and His Imperial Majesty have had a cordial and useful exchange of views during the past three days. The visit afforded an opportunity for the President and the Shah to become acquainted personally and to discuss matters of mutual interest to their countries.

Their talks included a review of political and military situations in the world; a discussion of the progress which Iran is making in economic and social advancement; a review of defense arrangements in which the two countries are associated; and aspects of United States economic and military aid programs in Iran.

Secretary of State Dean Rusk, Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Aram also participated in the talks.

His Imperial Majesty described the form and goals of the Third Iranian Economic Development Plan, which is scheduled to start later this year. The President and His Imperial Majesty agreed on the necessity for further acceleration of economic development in Iran, and on the need for continued external assistance to Iran to enable that country to pursue the goals of its economic development plans.

They discussed and were in complete agreement on the subject of the nature of the threat to the Middle East and to all free peoples. They reaffirmed the provisions of the bilateral agreement of 1959 concerning the maintenance of the independence and territorial integrity of Iran, and agreed on the necessity of collective security arrangements to achieve this end. They also agreed on the necessity of achieving a high level of internal economic development and social welfare in order to continue the internal stability necessary to resist external threats.

The friendly and extensive exchange of views between the President and His Imperial Majesty has been consonant with the close relationship between the two countries and has strengthened the bonds of friendship between them in their quest for common objectives of peace and well-being.

In taking leave of the President, His Imperial Majesty expressed his thanks for the friendly reception accorded him in the United States. Both the President and His Imperial Majesty were gratified by their fruitful discussions and by the spirit of cooperative understanding which marked those discussions.

JOHN F. KENNEDY, Exchange of Messages with the Shah of Iran, Februaury 13, 1963:

[ Released February 13, 1963. Dated January 29, 1963 ]

His Imperial Majesty, The Shahanshah of Iran:

Congratulations on your victory in the historic referendum on Saturday. Vice President Johnson, following his visit to Iran last August, told me of the warm reception accorded him by your people and their determination to advance and modernize on a broad front. It is therefore all the more gratifying to learn that a vast majority has supported your leadership in a clear and open expression of their will. This demonstration of support should renew your confidence in the rightness of your course and strengthen your resolve to lead Iran to further achievements in the struggle to better the lot of your people.

JOHN F. KENNEDY

NOTE: The Shah's reply, dated January 31, 1963, follows.

To the President of the United States of America:

Many thanks for your kind congratulations. The result of the referendum does indeed reflect the wholehearted approval of my fundamental reforms by the wellnigh unanimous vote of the people of Iran. It has increased the faith I have always had in their power of discrimination and their support of my determination to raise their standard of life.

Although we pride ourselves in our glorious past history, we are especially looking to the future trying to march abreast of the most free and happy progressive nations of the world. I know that in the implementation of our social and economic development we can count on the sympathy of our American friends.

With high esteem.

MOHAMMAD REZA PAHLAVI

-8-

LYNDON B. JOHNSON, Toast at a Dinner in Honor of the
Shah of Iran, June 5, 1964:

Your Imperial Majesties, Excellencies, la-
dies and gentlemen:

It gives us great pleasure to welcome
Their Majesties to this country today. Their
Majesties are familiar visitors here. We take
it as a compliment that they have come back
to see us again considering the burden of
responsibility which they bear and their dedi-
cation to the welfare of their people.

The occasion of this visit is a happy one
for us, the inauguration of the exhibit
"7,000 Years of Iranian Art" which will
open here in the National Gallery and then
tour our country. It will permit many
Americans to see for the first time outstand-
ing examples of the rich cultural history of
Iran. I hope that as many Americans as
possible will visit this exhibit and take ad-
vantage of this very great opportunity.

When we visited Tehran in 1962 we saw
for ourselves the energy and the determina-
tion and the skill with which His Majesty
and his ministers are carrying out great pro-
grams aimed at the welfare of his people.
His leadership has been a vital factor in
keeping Iran free and in modernizing this
ancient land. So it gives me great pleasure
and it is a high privilege today to ask those of
you, our friends in this country, together
with our guests to join in a toast to a re-
formist 20th century monarch, His Imperial
Majesty and the Empress Farah.

NOTE: The President proposed the toast at a luncheon in the State Dining Room at the White House.

-9-

LYNDON B. JOHNSON, Message to the Shah of Iran on
the 25th Anniversary of His Reign, September 16, 1965:

Your Imperial Majesty:

In the quarter century since Your Majesty
ascended the throne of Iran, the world has
lived through times of cataclysmic and de-
structive war and of hopeful and, I sincerely
pray, enduring peace. The friendship be-
tween Iran and the United States, strong and
enduring, has been enriched by the shared
experiences of our two nations. The pro-
gram of reform and renewal which you have
initiated in your country has demonstrated
your wisdom and compassion, your percep-
tion and statesmanship. The United States
is proud to have been associated in your
efforts to maintain the freedom of your
people and to establish for your country an
honored place in the world community of

peace-loving nations.

Your Majesty can take great pride from
the record of dangers met, obstacles over-
come, and progress achieved during this
turbulent period of world history. The
people of the United States of America join
me in expressing to Your Majesty our
friendship and high regard and our warm
personal wishes to you and your family on
this most auspicious occasion.

Sincerely,

LYNDON B. JOHNSON

[His Imperial Majesty, Mohammad Reza Shah
Pahlavi, Shahanshah of Iran, Tehran, Iran]

LYNDON B. JOHNSON, Welcoming Remarks for the Shah at
the White House Arrival Ceremony, August 22, 1967 (excerpt):

Iran is a different country now from the
one that we saw in 1962. The difference has
sprung from Your Majesty's dedicated, in-
spirational, and progressive leadership.

I see another difference—another lesson
that your leadership provides for all who
prize real progress. Because you are winning
progress without violence and without any
bloodshed—a lesson that others still have to
learn.

To destroy the existing order—to dismiss
the past without a plan for the present and
the future—that is never enough.

We Americans challenge every propa-
gandist and every demagogue—whether he
speaks on the radio waves of the world or
in the streets of our own cities—to demon-
strate his commitment to progress with the
facts and the figures. The people of the world
cry out for progress—not for propaganda.
They hunger for results—knowing they
cannot eat rhetoric.

Progress in Iran has not meant discarding

the past; it has meant keeping the best of
the past and forging it to a brighter future.

Your Majesty, we understand this kind
of progress. We are proud to have seen you
make it and we are pleased that we could
help along the way. But the accomplishments
are yours.

You and your people we think have sown
good seed. I hope to hear a great deal more
about that harvest after we go to the office.
I hope also to draw on Your Majesty's very
wise counsel—so valuable to me in the past—
as we discuss our common interest in build-
ing peace and security, particularly in the
Middle East.

Mrs. Johnson and I are very pleased that
you are with us here again. We hope to
return now—with special warmth—the wel-
come that you have so generously extended
to many Americans over many years, and
particularly to us on our cherished visit to
Tehran 5 years ago.

Thank you.

-10-

LYNDON B. JOHNSON, Toast at a Dinner in Honor of the Shah of Iran, August 22, 1967:

Your Imperial Majesty, ladies and gentlemen:

The poet Emerson has said that, "The ornament of a house is the friends who frequent it."

Our one regret this evening is that our warm friend and honored guest has not been able to ornament the occasion more—by bringing along his very beautiful and charming Empress. We miss her very much—because this administration champions beauty in all its forms.

His Majesty's coronation will take place in October, after a reign of nearly 26 years. This gathering of friends offers you heartfelt good wishes and prayers for still brighter success.

To them I must add special congratulations on Your Majesty's superb sense of timing. You have had the foresight to schedule your coronation when your polls are up.

You also have the satisfaction of looking back on a most impressive record of very progressive leadership. You have taught Iran's people that they have in their own strength and imagination the power to solve their own problems and to realize their own dreams.

When I visited Iran with Mrs. Johnson—just 5 years ago next week—the land reform program, that we discussed until late in the evening, was just beginning. Tonight, 50 percent of Iran's rural families farm their own land. Some 7,000 or more rural cooperatives have already been established—and more than 800 extension corpsmen are out helping the farmers of that country to acquire new agricultural skills.

This promise of new progress and dignity beckons all the Middle East. The people of that region have just suffered a very great shock. But that shock should and must not obscure the vision of what they can do to

solve their problems constructively, peace-
fully—by working together, by working with
their neighbors.

We stand ready tonight, as before, to help
those who ask our help—to strengthen the
independence of all who seek it in purposeful
partnership. Now, as always, America seeks
no domination—by force of arms, by in-
fluence of wealth, by stealth or subversion.

We seek to build in brotherhood. We want
to continue giving and learning—as we will
again when Iranian and American scientists
soon begin to study ways to exploit Iran's
water resources, and to employ the exciting
new technology of desalting. Our coopera-
tion will continue to grow in this and many
other ways.

We take great pride in having with us
this evening Mr. David Lilienthal who has
done so much to plan and develop our own
land and who is now giving his talented
energies to your country.

But turning the dreams we all share into
a shared reality asks a long journey of both
our countries. We take heart from the knowl-
edge that the people of Iran, under Your
Majesty's leadership, have the fortitude and
vision to continue their advance, and to so
inspire all who would follow in hope.

Ladies and gentlemen, I can conclude this
statement in no better way than to recall
for you the words of a great Persian poet:

"Dig deep and sow good seed;
Repay the debt you owe your country's soil;
You need not then be beholden to any man."

Our distinguished guest this evening has
truly sown good seed. I ask those of you who
have come from throughout our land to
join me in a toast to the architect of Iran's
future, the distinguished sovereign and
leader of the Iranian people, and our most
valued and trusted friend, His Imperial
Majesty, the Shah of Iran.

-11-

LYNDON B. JOHNSON, Toast at a Dinner in Honor of the
Shah of Iran, June 11, 1968 (excerpt):

Your Imperial Majesty, our beloved Chief Justice, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen:

Your Majesty's visit tonight reminds me of how often we have gathered here in this room to welcome distinguished visitors from abroad. Personally, I find that one of the real pleasures of the Presidency—I might even say, one of the few pleasures.

I am told that this administration has actually set some kind of a record. We have welcomed almost 200 heads of state and chiefs of government to this house in the 5 years of the Presidency, and that has made everybody happy, including, of course, my economic advisers. They are so grateful for every little bit of help on the balance of payments problem that we can get.

I guess all of you know that I am not overly impressed by records or tallies such as head counts or rollcalls or polls. I don't know where I could have acquired such a reputation. I guess maybe I just read it somewhere.

But just the same, when I looked over the number of foreign visitors in my administration—almost 200 in less than 5 years—I just happened to notice, Your Majesty, a striking statistic. That comes out to an average of four-fifths of a potentate a week.

But, Your Majesty, we do not parcel out your welcome in fractions. We are so happy, Mrs. Johnson and I, to greet you tonight with the full measure of all of our respect as well

as our deep affection.

We greet you as an old friend, not just an old friend of ours, but of the United States.

We regret only that His Majesty's lovely Empress is not with him this evening.

A poet once said that the best mirror is an old friend. Each time I talk with His Majesty I see the reflection of common values and a common desire to use the resources that God has given both of our countries and to use those resources for the benefit of both of our peoples.

Years ago, His Imperial Majesty determined to break the grip of poverty and disease and ignorance in his own ancient land. Now, in less than a decade, smallpox has been destroyed as a threat to the health of Iran. Ninety-five percent of the total population has been immunized. Malaria, which used to infect almost three of every four Iranian families, now infects fewer than one in 20.

Government expenditures for education have more than doubled in this decade. There are 400 new schools for nomad children alone, and seven of every 10 males of school age are literate. More than 2½ million tenant farmers have achieved the dignity of free-holders who own and who till their own land.

These great revolutionary reforms do not stand alone. They are great inspiration to others.

-12-

LYNDON B. JOHNSON, Joint Statement Following Discussions
with the Shah of Iran, June 12, 1968:

THE SHAHANSHAH and the President met on June 12 and discussed topics of mutual interest to their two countries. Their talks were conducted in the spirit of close friendship and cooperation that marks Iranian-US relations and the personal associations of His Majesty and the President. The President congratulated the Shahanshah on the continuing impressive pace of Iran's economic and social development.

The President informed His Majesty of the course of talks now occurring in Paris, and both leaders expressed hope that these discussions would lead to an early and durable peace in Southeast Asia.

They discussed the situation in the Middle East and agreed that the peaceful development of the area could be accomplished only through respect for the sovereignty of Middle Eastern states and cooperation among the states of the region for their security and independence. Both leaders expressed their intention of continuing to support efforts made through the United Nations to reduce tensions in the area, reaffirming their support for a just and lasting peace based on the resolution adopted by the Security Council of the United Nations on November 22, 1967.

The Shahanshah reaffirmed Iran's deter-
mination to sustain an adequate modern de-

fense force to ensure Iran's national security, and the President expressed the desire of the United States to continue cooperating with Iran to this end.

Of special interest to the Shahanshah and the President was a recent exchange of letters between the two governments in which it was agreed to initiate a program of scientific cooperation in areas of mutual interest. This program is expected to increase the exchange of personnel between the two countries, facilitate the transfer of scientific and technical information and stimulate collaborative research projects between Iranian and American scientists. It was decided that in Iran the Executive agency for implementation of this agreement will be the Ministry of Science and Higher Education, and for the United States the Smithsonian Institution.

His Majesty expressed to the President
his profound sorrow over the death of
Senator Robert F. Kennedy.

The Shahanshah in taking leave of the President expressed his appreciation for the warm and friendly reception accorded him. Both the Shahanshah and the President agreed that the considerations which have motivated Iranian and American cooperation are today more pertinent than ever.

-13-

LYNDON B. JOHNSON, Toast at a Dinner in Honor of the
Shah of Iran, December 5, 1968 (excerpt):

Your Excellency, Mrs. Hoveyda, Vice President Humphrey, Mrs. Humphrey, distinguished guests:

Few things are guaranteed to make an American feel more mortal than a visit from a leader of Iran.

In 8 years, we will be all excited about celebrating our 200th birthday in this country. Iranians can be forgiven if they wonder what all the excitement is about.

Last year Iran celebrated its 2,500th birthday. The success and the stability of Iran's Government is proof of the ancient saying, "He who is of a calm and happy nature will hardly feel the pressure of age."

When the founders of our country were debating what kind of government America should have, some argued that the title of President wasn't majestic enough. They wanted to call the Chief Executive, King. Some suggested Potentate. And I am just as glad that they settled for President.

How much I would hate to think how our fourth estate would react if they were told that they had to refer to me as the Shahanshah.

Your Excellency, it is always a pleasure, sir, for Americans to welcome visitors from your remarkable nation. Iran stands as a living symbol of two worlds—the world of the past, with your history of great literary and artistic achievement; and the world of the present, with your inspiring record of social and economic progress, which is the envy of the world.

We know that the dynamism of Iran owes much to the enlightened leadership of His Majesty—a great statesman and, we think, a very good friend.

He has long believed that the only monuments that are worthy of a nation are the living monuments of continuous achievement.

This afternoon I had a very long and a very frank discussion with the Prime Minister. He told me about some of the monuments that have been built in Iran; about he and the Shah, how they are urging young people to take part in the Government and to embark on careers in public service.

He told me about the vast improvements in Iran's schools and universities; about the great work that is being done to eradicate poverty and disease and ignorance; about the enthusiasm and the energy of his people and their dedication to breaking new ground in the scientific and technological fields; and above all, as the Prime Minister said to me this afternoon, he is talking to them about the monument of peace.

-14-

RICHARD NIXON, Remarks of Welcome at the White House
for the Shah of Iran, October 21, 1969:

Your Imperial Majesty and our guests
here on the White House lawn this
morning:

This is the ninth time over the past 20
years that Your Majesty has honored our
country by a visit to the United States,
and never in all that period will you be
more welcome, both personally and offi-
cially, than you are today on this truly
brilliant autumn day in Washington, D.C.

We welcome you because of the proud
and ancient land that you represent. We
welcome you because of the title which
you bear with such distinction. But we
welcome you also because of the personal
qualities, which those of us who know you
as I know you—those qualities you have
exemplified in your leadership of your
country.

Today on this parade ground we see the
flag of the United States and your flag;
and the colors of your flag are green and
red and white—green standing for the
rich spiritual heritage of your country, red
standing for courage, and white standing
for peace.

We know, Your Majesty, that you, in
your life, stand for those great virtues. But
we also know that you stand for more than
that. In a period in which many new
nations are being born, and in which old
nations are being born again, and in which
all nations are going through change, you
have provided an example of leadership
in your nation for all the world to see and
for many to follow.

That example I have seen firsthand in
my visits to your country. I recall that
many years ago you gathered your minis-
ters together; and speaking from the posi-

tion of royalty which you held, you made
a comment that has since been remem-
bered around the world. You said to
them: Make a revolution in this land.

And you have made a revolution in your
land, a revolution in terms of literacy, the
great progress that all of us have noted
there; a revolution in terms of land re-
form in which you, yourself, set the ex-
ample by giving much of your vast lands
to the people; a revolution in terms of
social and economic and political progress.

But the key to your success has been in
the nature of that revolution. It has been a
revolution designed not to destroy and to
tear down, but a revolution to build—a
peaceful revolution.

It is this example that the world sees in
Iran. It is this example that is your legacy,
not only to your country but to those who
seek progress—peaceful progress in na-
tions around the world.

Your Majesty, we welcome you here
today—welcome you because of those
qualities that I have mentioned and wel-
come you also because of the personal
friendship that we have had the opportu-
nity to enjoy, going back over so many
years.

We know that all of the American peo-
ple, during your brief stay here, will want
to express, as I have tried to express in my
words today, their admiration, their re-
spect, their affection for you and for the
people of Iran.

NOTE: The President spoke at 10:55 a.m. on the South Lawn at the White House where His Imperial Majesty Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, Shahanshah of Iran, was given a formal welcome with full military honors.

-15-

RICHARD NIXON, Toast at a Dinner in Honor of the Shah of Iran, October 21, 1969:

Your Imperial Majesty and friends of
Iran and the United States who are
gathered here at the White House tonight:

We are honored again to receive His
Imperial Majesty in this house and in
this room. Before the dinner, I found that
this, of course, is not the first time that His
Majesty has been here; but you will be
interested to note that he is one of the
few leaders, heads of state in the world,
who has been a guest in this house and in
this room as the guest of President Tru-
man and then of President Eisenhower
and then President Kennedy and then
President Johnson and now, tonight, as
our guest.

I would say on that count he is far
ahead of me. [Laughter] He is somewhat
younger than I, although he will celebrate
a birthday on Sunday.

I found in checking into his background
that we had one thing in common—a love
for sports. We both played football. There
was a difference. I sat on the bench. He
was captain of the team.

But in welcoming him here tonight, I
could speak of those usual pleasantries
and diplomatic clichés that grace such
occasions; but I think because there are
so many here who know his country and
have for his country the affection and ad-
miration that I have and Mrs. Nixon has;
because there are so many here from his
own country, that you would like it better
if I shared with you a personal view of the
leadership he has provided for his coun-
try and the cause of peace and freedom
in the world.

In 1953, my wife and I had a very great
privilege to travel around the world, and
particularly through the countries of
Asia. In that period, not too long after
World War II, the great leaders of World
War II were still living and still active and
powerful on the world scene.

I remember them well, now. The
names, most of them you will recall, some
are still active: Yoshida in Japan, Syng-
man Rhee in Korea, Chiang Kai-shek in
Taiwan, Menzies in Australia, Nehru in
India, Ghulam Mohammed in Pakistan,
and many others.

The last stop on that long trip of 70
days was Iran. On that stop we met for
the first time our very honored guest to-
night. He made a very deep impression
on me and on my wife at that time, a deep
impression because of his own personal
character, and also with regard to the
various other leaders that I had seen,
each of whom had greatness in his own
way, because in 1953 Iran had very diffi-
cult problems.

There was martial law in the land. The
father of the now Secretary for Foreign
Affairs was Prime Minister,¹ and His
Majesty was the symbol, and not just the
symbol but the actual leader of authority
who kept the nation together, to whom
all of those in government and the people
of Iran turned in a moment of crisis.

There were those who thought that
Iran in 1953 might not make it. When I
left Iran, I knew it would make it. I knew

¹ Ardeshir Zahedi and his father Fazollah Zahedi.

-16-

(Continued) RICHARD NIXON, Toast, 1969

it because of the men I had seen. I knew
it not only because of the Government
leaders to whom I have referred, but par-
ticularly because of the personality and
the strength and the character of the man
who is our honored guest tonight.

He was a young head of state then, just
as he is really a young head of state today.
I was a young Vice President. But what I
recall was this: Despite the deep depres-
sion of spirit which seemed to infect many
of those who observed Iran in that period
of crisis, His Majesty saw the problems
but also had a vision for the future.

Omar Khayyám has referred eloquently
to the ability of a leader, a great leader,
to heed the roll of distant drums. His
Majesty had that ability. He saw his
country in the future, and he proceeded
to move his country into the future, and
that story of progress is now one of the
most exciting stories of all the develop-
ment that has occurred in the world in the
past 16 years.

I referred to it this morning: Progress
in education, progress in economic devel-
opment, progress in social development,
until today Iran stands as one of the
strongest, the proudest among all the
nations of the world.

So today we honor a nation and a
people with whom we are proud to stand
as friends and allies. We honor also a man
who has those elements of leadership
which are too rare in the world.

In a moment you will rise with me and
we will drink a toast. We will be drinking
a toast, as has happened in this room for
over 150 years, to His Majesty. But I can
say that tonight I feel very deep in my
heart, as everyone here who knows him
and knows his country and his record,
that when we say "His Majesty," we
realize we are drinking to a man who has
demonstrated majesty—majesty in his
leadership, majesty in his reverence for
the past, but in his vision for the future.

Our friends, will you please rise and
raise your glasses to the Shahanshah.

NOTE: The President spoke at 10:10 p.m. in
the State Dining Room at the White House.

-17-

RICHARD NIXON, Toast at a State Dinner in Tehran, May
30, 1972 (excerpt):

Before doing so, I wish to say that I have had the opportunity during the period that I have served in office—8 years as Vice President, when Mrs. Nixon and I first had the opportunity of visiting Tehran, and then over 3 years as President of the United States—and even some years out of office, the opportunity of visiting over 70 nations. I have met the heads of state and the heads of government of most of those nations, and I think that all of this company should know that in evaluating those that I have met, heads of state and heads of government, His Imperial Majesty is one who has an understanding not only of the bilateral problems that our two countries sometimes have—fortunately relatively small ones—but beyond that, an understanding of the area in which he lives and of the international problems.

His advice and counsel have been invaluable through the years, and it was for that reason that, after my visit to the Soviet Union, I was glad that the opportunity was provided, through Your Majesty's invitation, to come here, to consult with you, and to get the benefit of your wisdom in terms of the future policies of the United States of America.

Speaking now of what these visits mean, and what the future is, I think it is important for us to bear in mind that while we have been at what is called the summit, that there has been no intention on the part of the two governments represented at that summit conference—no intention to divide the world into two spheres of influence, no intention to set up a condominium. Certainly on our part—and I express here the policy of the United States in the past and the present, and I know what will be the policy in the future—we consider it important and vital that as a great nation and a powerful

nation, that we seek good relations with all nations in the world.

But we also recognize that as we begin a dialogue with some nations with which we have had no dialogue at all—I refer to the visit that we paid earlier this year to the People's Republic of China—and when we begin conversations that can, and we trust will, develop a better relationship with a nation that from time to time since the great World War II has been an adversary on occasion—that as we do both of these things, we have not overlooked a very fundamental fact of international life, and that is that it is vital that we build our policy on the alliances and the friendships that we have had in the past, that we have now, and that we hope to have in the future.

That is one of the things that this visit symbolizes. We are proud that Iran is a friend of the United States, that the United States is a friend of Iran.

We are proud of the fact that we have some bonds between us—bonds that have been formalized by treaty. But I would point out to this audience, those who are here, that bonds that are formalized by treaty can be one thing; what is more important are those bonds that are further underscored by a personal relationship, a personal respect, a personal esteem, between the leaders of the countries involved.

I value the friendship that it has been my privilege to have with His Majesty over these years. I believe that all American Presidents have valued the friendship that they have had on their part with the leaders of this country.

What I am saying, very simply, is this: We are proud to have the official relationships with the Government of Iran, which have been set down on pieces of paper

-18-

(Continued) RICHARD NIXON, Toast, 1972

sometimes called treaties, sometimes called agreements. But what is more important is that we are proud of the fact that the relationship goes beyond simply the piece of paper, that it goes to the personal relationship which we see exemplified in this magnificent dinner tonight and which we trust will always be the hallmark of the relations between our two countries.

I should like to bring my remarks to a conclusion tonight by informally referring to an impression I had as we came into the city today. It was a glorious day, as all of you will remember. The sky was blue, we could see the mountains in the distance, the weather was just right, as if it had been ordered for the occasion. And then, as the motorcade moved from the airport out through the suburbs and then finally into the city, we saw the people on the streets. We could tell from the expressions on their faces they had not been ordered to come because, while you can order people to get out on the streets, you cannot order them to smile. You cannot order them to wave, and particularly, you cannot do that with the children. It must come from their hearts, and it had come from their hearts.

We saw them there, not hundreds, not thousands, but tens of thousands of girls and boys, smiling, waving, with their American flags and the Iranian flags side by side.

I am sure that through His Majesty's mind ran the same thoughts that ran through mine: Our obligation is to them; our obligation is to their future.

What we have done in the meetings that we have had in this past week is only a beginning. It possibly builds a foundation for a better future between two great nations and a foundation, possibly, for a

better chance for peace for all nations in the world.

Our meetings here helped to build that foundation, a foundation of good relations that already exists between our two great countries, but a foundation for more progress in the future—progress which will benefit not just our generation, but that generation, one that will make us, as the leaders of our countries, proud of that leadership, proud of our people, proud of our heritage—yours 2,500 years old, ours so much younger.

But proud as we are of that heritage and proud as we are of that country, recognizing that our responsibility is to keep what is best from the past but also to build for the future.

As I look at Your Majesty's record, what you have done for this country in terms of the progressive actions in everything from land reform to education, so many other areas, I realize that your thoughts are, of course, about the proud past of this great nation and this great people.

But overriding that are your hopes for the future—the future of those children we saw on the streets of Tehran today.

-19-

RICHARD NIXON, Joint Communique Following Discussions
With the Shah of Iran, May 31, 1972 (excerpt):

During his visit the President held dis-
cussions with His Imperial Majesty the
Shahanshah in a warm and cordial at-
mosphere, reflecting the close and friendly
relations that exist between the two
countries.

The President expressed his admiration
for Iran's impressive record in the devel-
opment of a strong economy and the suc-
cessful implementation of His Imperial
Majesty's "White Revolution." His Im-
perial Majesty outlined the main features
of Iran's new five year plan with particu-
lar emphasis on agro-industry and
socio-economic projects. The President
reiterated the readiness of the United
States to cooperate with Iran as appro-
priate in this extensive program and im-
portant enterprise.

-20-

RICHARD NIXON, Remarks of Welcome to the Shah of
Iran, the White House, July 24, 1973:

Your Imperial Majesty:

It is a very great honor and a special
honor for me to welcome you again to our
Nation's Capital and, at the same time, to
welcome Her Imperial Majesty, the Emp-
ress, and all the members of your official
party from Iran.

I say a very special honor for several
reasons, first because our friendship goes
back over a period of 20 years when we
first met in Tehran, when I was Vice
President of the United States and when
you then were a very young Emperor.

Through those 20 years, both during
the periods that I have served in office
and during the periods that I have been
a private citizen, I have been honored
and I have been greatly assisted by re-
ceiving the benefit of your counsel on
world matters.

The second reason that it is a very
special honor to have you here today is
because of the unbelievably spectacular
progress that your country has made un-
der your leadership. I remember it 20
years ago. I saw it again when you re-
ceived Mrs. Nixon and me so graciously
just a year ago in Tehran, and there is
no area in the world in which one can
see more spectacular development—de-
velopment in which the people of the
country have benefited—than in your
country. The whole world applauds you
for the leadership you have provided to
your people in bringing economic progress
and justice to them.

The third reason will, of course, be the
major subject of our conversations today,
and that is that we welcome you here as
not only an old friend, as a progressive
leader of your own people, but as a world
statesman of the first rank. Our talks over
the years have ranged over many, many
subjects, and it is particularly important
that we meet at this time.

This is the first meeting that I will have
had with a head of government or head
of state since the meeting I had with Gen-
eral Secretary Brezhnev. It is significant
to note that of all the areas in the world
which pose a potential threat to peace in
the world, that Iran is in a very key, cen-
tral area.

I refer, of course, to the Mideast, to the
Persian Gulf, and to all of that area that
surrounds it. What gives us a great deal of
heart, those of us all over the world who
are interested in peace, is that you have
always stood for, and stand for now, a
policy of contributing to the forces of
peace and stability rather than to the
forces of war and destruction.

I know, therefore, that our talks will
cover the whole range of world problems,
but particularly that I will have the bene-
fit of your advice on the problems in this
critical area of the world where with re-
sponsible leadership we can avoid war
and build a new era of peace for the
people of that area who deserve it.

Certainly, I have looked forward to
these talks for a long time, and I know
that I will not be disappointed. And I
hope you will not be, by the progress that
we will make in developing those policies
which will contribute not only to peace
but to the progress and the prosperity
which your country has enjoyed, for all
of that area of the world.

So again, we welcome you today offi-
cially, but more than that, we particularly
welcome you and the Empress as good
friends and old friends. We treasure that
friendship, and from that friendship we
hope to work together toward a better
world for both of our peoples.

NOTE: The President spoke at 10:13 a.m. on
the South Lawn at the White House where
the Shah of Iran was given a formal welcome
with full military honors.

-21-

RICHARD NIXON, Toast at a State Dinner in Honor of the Shah of Iran, July 24, 1973 (excerpt):

And I can only say, in speaking to this very distinguished group of your friends, friends of Iran—and everyone in this room and those listening to us on this recording are friends of your country—I can say to them that as we think of the peace of the world, that Your Majesty plays a very central role in terms of keeping that peace and of building it.

For example, when we think of where Iran is, its place in history, going back 2,500 years, its place geographically, where it is the bridge between Europe and Asia, where it is the opening to the Indian Ocean and South Asia, and also to the Mideast, when we think also of the very strategic place that Iran occupies in that critical area of the world which many believe is potentially the most explosive part, the whole area of the Mideast and the Indian Ocean, I can only say that those who want peace, as you want it and as I want it and as all of us in this room want it, those of us who believe in peace, we are fortunate that Your Majesty occupies the place of leadership that you occupy today.

For the 20 years that I have known you, Your Majesty, you have worked for the progress of your own people with remarkable results, and you have also worked for peace and stability in not only your part of the world but in all the world. And looking to the future, we know that your leadership will be critical in determining that we can find a way to avoid any kind of eruption which could lead to breaking the peace in that part of the world, which all of us look upon today as potentially dangerous.

Having spoken of these very serious subjects, may I say on a very personal note that Mrs. Nixon and I recall our visit to your country in 1953, to Tehran, and how graciously you received us, and then again in 1967, when I was there alone, and then, of course, again last year, just after our visit to the Soviet Union.

We have a very special place in our hearts for the people of Iran and a very special place for you—a special place for you, first, as a courageous leader of your own people, as one who has worked for progress for the people of Iran, your people, and also as a world statesman who has contributed so much in the past and, we know, will contribute so much in the future to building that structure of peace which is so essential for all of us to enjoy.

For these and many other reasons that people in this room will share, I know that all of you will want to join me in the toast that I will propose to His Imperial Majesty, the Shahanshah, and to Her Majesty, the Empress of Iran.

NOTE: The President spoke at 10:07 p.m. in the State Dining Room at the White House.

-22-

RICHARD NIXON, Toast at a Dinner in His Honor at the
Iranian Embassy, Washington, July 25, 1973 (excerpt):

I think everyone in this room who was not born to royalty must wonder how it would be, and all of us would agree that to be born in a royal family perhaps poses the greatest challenge that life can pose, because it would be so easy just to live that royal life that one receives without having given anything for it and enjoy it, receive the adulation of the crowds, and end it without contributing much or, perhaps, taking away much from the people among whom he or she works.

But Iran was blessed with the fact that the young man who became its Emperor was not that kind of royalty. He was a man who said very early—he wrote his autobiography—that peace should not be just the absence of war, it should be creative peace.

He was one who wrote very early, he from royalty, from monarchy, said, "Iran needs a new revolution." And over a period of 20 years, what he has done, he, with the assistance of so many of his colleagues in this room from Iran and also with the support of a splendid people, 31 million strong, have created a new, strong, vital nation there. New and strong and vital in one sense, but with its roots very, very deep in history, over 2,500 years.

And it is out of such things that great nations are built. Leadership, which our host tonight, the Emperor, represents, and a people with a sense of mission and destiny and also with a great history behind them which they must live up to.

These are some of the thoughts that came to me as I sat here tonight, 20 years later, here in this bit of territory of Iran in the United States of America. And,

Your Imperial Majesty, I want you to know that for Mrs. Nixon and for me it was just as great a pleasure tonight to walk into this bit of Iran as it was to come there 20 years ago after that long, long trip through Asia, South Asia, and other parts of the world.

I know that many of you have other feelings you would like to express, and I cannot adequately express them for you. I can only say this: that as we look at the peace of the world, we know that the area of the world in which His Majesty plays such an important role is an area that could cause very grave problems, but the fact that he is there, the fact that he believes so strongly in the kind of peace that can survive, a peace not based on weakness, but a peace based on strength, not the strength of arrogance, but the strength of competence, confidence, ability, magnanimity.

When we have that kind of a leader there, that kind of a people with that kind of a background, then the chances for peace in that world to survive and to grow and to be creative are much greater, and that is why we are fortunate that he is there with his leadership and also by his side his Empress, who has made such a great impression not only in her visits here but such a splendid contribution to the people of Iran in all of the villages and communities as well as in the great city of Tehran, which most of us know.

-23-

GERALD R. FORD, Welcoming Remarks at White House Arrival of the Shah of Iran, May 15, 1975:

It is an honor to welcome our distinguished guests, His Imperial Majesty the Shahanshah of Iran and Her Imperial Majesty the Shahbanou, once again to our national capital.

The visit of Your Imperial Majesties reflects the cordial personal and close governmental relations between the United States and Iran through many administrations. Ours is an old and tested friendship; it will continue to be so in the future.

Since Your Imperial Majesties last visited Washington, the world has seen many changes. But throughout this period the U.S. commitment to peace and progress for the world has remained firm. Our commitment to a continuity of relations and constructive cooperation with friends such as Iran has remained constant, even while the world has changed.

We continue to build on the longstanding foundation of our mutual interests and aspirations. The United States and Iran have expanded and intensified cooperation on

many fronts. Together, we can create an example for others to follow in the new era of interdependence which lies ahead.

Iran is an amazing country—an ancient civilization that through the centuries has retained its distinctive national identity and culture. In recent years, Iran has achieved remarkable progress, serving as a model of economic development. Its extraordinary achievements have been inspired by one of the world's senior statesmen, our distinguished visitor, His Imperial Majesty.

I look forward, Your Imperial Majesty, to the talks which we shall have during your visit to review what has been accomplished by our two nations and to explore new dimensions for harmonizing the interests of our two nations and increasing the cooperation between us in the cause of peace and prosperity for our two peoples and for the world.

On behalf of Mrs. Ford and the American people and our Government, it is my pleasure to welcome Their Imperial Majesties to Washington.

GERALD R. FORD, Toast at a White House Dinner in Honor of the Shah of Iran, May 15, 1975 (excerpt):

Your visit here is, of course, a tribute to the long legacy of a very close and very cooperative tie between Iran and the United States, and I hope, on the other hand, that you will think upon this as a visit between old friends.

I am the seventh President, Your Imperial Majesty, to have met with you on such an occasion. The facts speak volumes for the continuity and the duration of our bilateral relations and the importance that we attach to the broadening and the deepening of those ties and those interests of peace and progress throughout the world. These are objectives to which the United States remains deeply committed. These objectives Iran shares with us.

Our nations have thus brought together a very unique relationship, working together

cooperatively for the past several decades on the basis of a mutual respect, and I am looking forward to continuing this great tradition with yourself, and this country and your country. And it is, as I see it, a living and a growing tradition.

Recently, our common bonds have acquired a new scope as Iran, under Your Imperial Majesty's wise leadership, has made extraordinary strides in its economic development and its relationships with other countries of its region and the world.

The progress that you have made serves as a superb model to nations everywhere. Iran has moved from a country once in need of aid to one which last year committed a substantial part of its gross national product to aiding less fortunate nations.

Iran is also playing a very leading role in

-24-

what we hope will be a very successful effort to establish a more effective economic relationship between the oil producers, the industrialized nations, and the developing nations.

As an indication of Iran's economic importance to the world scene, I am impressed that civilian non-oil trade between the United States and Iran is expected to total over $20 billion by 1980.

The present period will be seen by historians as a very major milestone in Iran's ancient and very glorious history. The leader whose vision and dynamism has brought Iran to this stage, His Imperial Majesty, is clearly one of the great men of his generation, of his country, and of the world.

Just as Iran's role and potential goes far beyond its own border, so, too, His Imperial Majesty is one of the world's great states-

men. His experience of over 30 years as Iran's leader has been marked by dedication to progress and prosperity at home and significant contributions to the cause of peace and cooperation abroad.

We deeply value our friendship and our ties with Iran, and we will remain strong in that friendship, now and for the future. In an interdependent world, we remain deeply grateful for the constructive friendship of Iran, which is playing a very important role in pursuit of a more peaceful, stable, and very prosperous world. And we, for our part, remain constant in our friendship with this great country. We pledge ourselves to insuring that our ties are creatively adjusted to meet the pressing problems and changing realities of the present world.

JIMMY CARTER, Remarks of Welcome at White House Arrival
Ceremony, November 15, 1977:

THE PRESIDENT. This morning, our Nation and its people are indeed honored to have visiting us from Iran His Imperial Majesty and Empress Farah, long-time friends of our country, historically bound together. We are very delighted that the Shah could come here with his beautiful wife.

The first American President with whom the Shah met was Franklin Roosevelt, in 1943 at a Tehran conference. He's met with seven Presidents. And this is a great honor for me to have him come this first year that I'm in office, to share with me the historical ties that have bound our nations together and the pledges of friendship and cooperation and mutual purpose, indeed, partnership as we face the coming years.

When the Shah took over the leadership of his nation 36 years ago, Iran was occupied by foreign powers. Since that time, the progress in his country and his

growth into a world leader has indeed been remarkable and has aroused the admiration of the world.

This is a time for a searching analysis of the beneficial influence that can be exerted upon the other people of the world in energy, trade, and with us, a partnership and a mutual defense which binds our countries together and which provides us with an opportunity to preserve the peace in the Middle East.

Iran is strong and it is at peace with its neighbors. We now have working relationships between Iran and our country within 50 different universities. There are about 30,000 Iranian students here and about 40,000 Americans in Iran. This is a wonderful opportunity for us to share experiences and to plan together for the future.

Your Imperial Majesty, we welcome you and the Empress Farah to our country.

-25-

JIMMY CARTER, White House Statement Following the First
Meeting with the Shah of Iran, November 15, 1977 (excerpt):

The President began by expressing his personal pleasure at meeting His Imperial Majesty for the first time, noting that this visit will enable them to establish close personal ties of friendship. The President expressed his appreciation for His Majesty's message of condolence to the families of those who lost their lives in the recent disaster in Georgia.

The President reaffirmed to His Majesty that he fully supports the special relationship which the two countries have developed over the last 30 years and gave his personal com-

mitment to strengthen further our ties. The President emphasized the broad mutuality of our interests in the region and globally and expressed appreciation for the support which Iran has extended in achieving our shared objectives. The President reiterated the importance that he attaches to a strong, stable, and progressive Iran under the leadership of His Imperial Majesty. To that end, he emphasized that it remains the policy of the United States to cooperate with Iran in its economic and social development programs and in continuing to help meet Iran's security needs.

JIMMY CARTER, Toast at a State Dinner in Honor of the Shah
of Iran, November 15, 1977 (excerpt):

There's an old saying in the East that history is a mirror to the past and a lesson for the future. And if there was ever a country which has blossomed forth under enlightened leadership, it would be the ancient empire of Persia, which is now the great country of Iran.

When the Shah assumed a mantle of leadership in his own country 36 years ago, he faced a very dismal future. His country was occupied then by foreign forces. His father had started some social change that was very doubtful about its own success.

At that time, there were about 1,000 people in Iran who had advanced college degrees, and there are now 15 colleges and universities in Iran, 175,000 students in the college, and the Shah just told me that in 10 years, they'll have 500,000 college students in Iran. This is a remarkable demonstration of leadership and growth in the spiritual and also knowledge of the people of that great country.

As you well know, Iran has always been kind of a crossroads. The cultural history of Iran is absolutely remarkable. And Empress Farah has taken on her own shoulders a responsibility for preserving that ancient culture so that they can learn from the past and preserve the beauty for the future.

There's also been a growth in the well-being of the people there. They've expanded the opportunity for good health care as well as education.

Just not much more than 15 years ago, their average per capita income in Iran was not much more than a hundred dollars per year. The Shah just told me it was now $2,220 per year last month, and it's probably more this month. [Laughter] That shows what a tremendous job he is doing.

Iran has recognized that their great natural resources need to be husbanded and invested to guarantee a sound and a prosperous future in the years to come.

Iran is a country that is strong militarily, is strong politically, and is strong in the commitment and in the spirit of its people and also is at peace with its neighbors, is well respected.

Iran is a nation, and its leadership is epitomized by a man who has a trust of other countries. Even those that historically have been enemies now look upon the Shah and the people of Iran with a great deal of confidence and trust, recognizing that they are a stabilizing influence in that region—indeed, throughout the Persian Gulf, the Indian

(cont'd)

-26-

Ocean—and with a growing degree of influence, in the Western World, in Japan, and in Africa.

I had a chance today to listen to the Shah explain to me the perspective of the region and the rest of the world as viewed from the great country of Iran. And I learned a great deal from him as he talked about the history and the present and future possibilities of the people in Pakistan and Afghanistan, of Burma, India, Iraq, other nations in the Middle East, in the Horn of Africa, things that I had not seen from that particular point of view. And it helped me greatly to understand the special challenges that face us as a great nation and the importance of the partnership that we have with the people of Iran.

We are bound together with unbreakable ties of friendship, of past history, a mutual commitment to the present and to the future. Our military alliance is unshakable, and it's an alliance that is beneficent in its impact on the rest of the world. Iran seeks no dominion over other people. They seek no territorial gains. They just want peace, and they have spread their influence, because of the great leadership of the Shah, very rapidly.

We look upon Iran's strength as an extension of our own strength, and Iran looks upon our strength as an extension of theirs. We derive mutual benefit from this close relationship. The Shah has been to our country more than a dozen times. His first meeting with an American President was in 1943, when President Roosevelt was in Tehran at a

conference there; and subsequently he's met with every President we've had—with Truman and with Eisenhower, with Kennedy and with Nixon, with Ford, and myself, with President Johnson. And this is a continuation of a growing understanding of one another.

The Shah is very gracious in his attitude toward Americans. In addition to the 175,000 students in his own colleges, there are about 30,000 Iranian students in the colleges of the United States. And this guarantees an investment in the future of understanding of one another. We have about 40,000 Americans in Iran, and in a very gracious demonstration of friendship which was not well publicized at all, the Shah has provided extra allotments of funds and educational opportunities for American young students there—boys and girls who are at the grammar school and high school level. This is something that he didn't have to do, but it was just an extra demonstration of how valuable they consider our friendship with them.

I would like to say, in closing, that we look upon Iran as a very stabilizing force in the world at large. We don't fear the future when we have friends like this great country.

There are some emerging nations who are assuming regional leadership roles which, in the past, has not been recognized. But I think that Iran is undoubtedly one of those great countries. And with the spreading of their own influence, the world is guaranteed a greater degree of assurance for peace.

-28-

Recently, Empress Farah gave us a beautiful book called "The Bridge of Turquoise"—we get many gifts of that kind from visitors—and for a few days I have to admit that we didn't pay enough attention to it. And one night I started to thumb through the pages, and I called my wife, Rosalynn, and I called my daughter, Amy, who climbed into my lap, and we spent several hours studying very carefully the beautiful history that this books portrays of Persia, of Iran, of its people, of its land, of its heritage and its history, and also of its future. It caused me to be reminded again of the value of ancient friendships and the importance of close ties that bind us as we face difficult problems.

Iran, because of the great leadership of the Shah, is an island of stability in one of the more troubled areas of the world.

This is a great tribute to you, Your Majesty, and to your leadership and to the respect and the admiration and love which your people give to you.

The transformation that has taken place in this nation is indeed remarkable under your leadership. As we sat together this afternoon discussing privately for a few moments what might be done to bring peace to the Middle East, I was profoundly impressed again not only with your wisdom and your judgment and your sensitivity and insight but also with the close compatibility that we found in addressing this difficult question.

As we visit with leaders who have in their hands the responsibility for making decisions that can bring peace to the Middle East and ensure a peaceful existence for all of us who live in the world, no matter where our nations might be, it is important that we continue to benefit from your sound judgment and from your good advice.

We also had a chance to discuss another potential troubled area, the Horn of Africa. And here again we live at a great distance from it. But this region which already sees the initiation of hostility and combat needs to be brought under the good influence of you and others who live in this region. And we will be glad to cooperate in any way that we can. We want peace to return. We want Somalia and Ethiopia to be friends again, border disputes to be eased and those of us who do have any influence at all to use their influence for these purposes.

We have also known about the great benefits that we derive in our own nation from the close business relationships that we have with Iran.

As I drove through the beautiful streets of Tehran today with the Shah, we saw literally thousands of Iranian citizens standing beside the street with a friendly attitude, expressing their welcome to me. And I also saw hundreds, perhaps even thousands of American citizens who stood there welcoming their President in a nation which has taken them to heart and made them feel at home. There are about 30,000 Americans here who work in close harmony with the people of Iran to carve out a better future for you which also helps to ensure, Your Majesty, a better future for ourselves.

We share industrial growth, we share scientific achievements, we share research and development knowledge, and this gives us the stability for the present which is indeed valuable to both our countries.

We are also blessed with the largest number of foreign students in our country from your own nation. And I think this ensures, too, that we share the knowledge that is engendered by our great universities, but also that when these young leaders come back to your country for many years in the future, for many generations in the future, our friendship is ensured. We are very grateful for this and value it very much.

I have tried to become better acquainted with the culture of Iran in the preparation for my visit here. I was particularly impressed with a brief passage from one of Iran's great poets, Saadi. And I would like to read a few words from him. Empress Farah tells me that he lived about 600 years ago.

"Human beings are like parts of a body, created from the same essence. When one part is hurt and in pain, others cannot remain in peace and quiet. If the misery of others leaves you indifferent and with no feeling of sorrow, then you cannot be called a human being."

I asked Empress Farah why this poet was so famous here in Iran, because he had impressed me so greatly, too. And she said because he had the greatest facility for professing profound thoughts in the simplest possible words that the average citizen could understand.

(cont'd)

-29-

Well, this brief passage shows that there is within the consciousness of human beings a close tie with one's neighbors, one's family, and one's friends, but it also ties us with human beings throughout the world. When one is hurt or suffers, all of us, if we are human beings, are hurt and we suffer.

The cause of human rights is one that also is shared deeply by our people and by the leaders of our two nations.

Our talks have been priceless, our friendship is irreplaceable, and my own gratitude is to the Shah, who in his wisdom and with his experience has been so helpful to me, a new leader.

We have no other nation on Earth who is closer to us in planning for our mutual military security. We have no other nation with whom we have closer consultation on regional problems that concern us both. And there is no leader with whom I have a deeper sense of personal gratitude and personal friendship.

On behalf of the people of the United States, I would like to offer a toast at this time to the great leaders of Iran, the Shah and the Shahbanou and to the people of Iran and to the world peace that we hope together we can help to bring.

Happy New Year to you.

JIMMY CARTER, Press Conference, October 10, 1978 (excerpt):

**Q.** I'd like to ask you about Iran. How do we view the situation involving the Shah there now? Is he secure? How important is it to U.S. interests that the Shah remain in power? And what, if anything, can the U.S. Government do to keep him in power?

**A.** The strategic importance to our country—I think to the entire Western world—of a good relationship with a strong and independent Iran is crucial. We have historic friendships with Iran. I think they are a great stabilizing force in their part of the world. They are a very important trade partner. They've acted very responsibly.

My own belief is that the Shah has moved aggressively to establish democratic principles in Iran and to have a progressive attitude toward social questions, social problems. This has been the source of much of the opposition to him in Iran.

We have no inclination to try to decide the internal affairs of Iran. My own hopes have been that there could be peace there, an end to bloodshed, and an orderly transformation into more progressive social arrangements and also increased democratization of the government itself which I believe the Shah also espouses. He may not be moving fast enough for some; he may be moving too fast for others. I don't want to get involved in the specifics.

-30-

JIMMY CARTER, Interview for "Bill Moyers' Journal,"

November 13, 1978 (excerpt);

**Q.** Let me apply the multiple choice difficult options equation to a couple of other contemporary and very live issues. One is Iran. What are the options facing you there?

**A.** We look on the Shah, as you know, as a friend, a loyal ally, and the good relationship that Iran has had and has now with ourselves and with the other democracies in the world, the Western powers, as being very constructive and valuable. Also, having a strong and independent Iran in that area is a very stabilizing factor, and we would hate to see it disrupted by violence and the government fall with an unpredictable result. The Shah has been primarily criticized within Iran because he has tried to democratize the country and because he's instituted social reforms in a very rapid fashion.

Some of his domestic adversaries either disagree with the way he's done it, or think he hasn't moved fast enough, or too fast, and deplore his breaking of ancient religious and social customs, as Iran has become modern.

**Q.** But he was also criticized for running a police state—political prisoners—

**A.** That's exactly right. I think the Shah has had that criticism, sometimes perhaps justified—I don't know the details of it. But I think there's no doubt that Iran has made great social progress and has moved toward a freer expression of people. Even in recent months, for instance, the Shah has authorized or directed, I guess, the Parliament to have all of its deliberations open and televised, something that we don't even do in our country here.

**Q.** You think this is all too late?

**A.** I hope not. I don't know what will come eventually. I would hope that a coalition government could be formed rapidly. At the present time, there's a quasimilitary government. The Shah has reconfirmed his commitment to have open and democratic elections, maybe within 6 months or 8 months. I hope that would be possible.

Our inclination is for the Iranian people to have a clear expression of their own views and to have a government intact in Iran that accurately expresses a majority view in Iran.

**Q.** But can we do anything to encourage that, or are our hands tied?

**A.** No, we don't try to interfere in the internal affairs of Iran.

**Q.** We did put the Shah in, but you're saying we can't keep him in.

**A.** I think that's a decision to be made by the people of that country.

**Q.** Does it hurt you sometimes to have to sit back and do nothing when you know there are large stakes in a part of the world beyond your influence?

**A.** We don't have any inclination to be involved in the internal affairs of another country unless our own security should be directly threatened, and that's a philosophy that I have espoused ever since I've been in the national political realm.

I just think we've learned our lessons the hard way in Vietnam and in other instances, and we've tried to be loyal to our allies and loyal to our friends, to encourage one-person, one-vote, majority rule, the democratic processes, the protection of human rights.

Obviously, we have not always succeeded in encouraging other people to measure up to our own standards, but I think we've been consistent in our effort.

**Q.** But this is, again, where some criticism arises in some circles in this country who say the Soviets have a stake in what happens in Iran, and they are free to move clandestinely or any other way that they wish; but if we take the position that you're espousing we'll sit back and do nothing when we should be in there covertly or clandestinely or overtly taking a tough stand saying that we may not like the Shah but we need him in power. You're saying that day is over, that we cannot do that.

**A.** No, we have made it clear through my own public statements and those of Secretary Vance that we support the Shah and support the present government, recognizing that we don't have any control over the decisions ultimately made by the Iranian people and the stability of that region; the absence of the success of terrorism, of violence, the anarchy that might come with the complete disruption of their government is a threat to peace.

We don't have any evidence that the Soviets, for instance, are trying to disrupt the existing government structure in Iran nor that they are a source of violence in Iran. I think they recognize—they have a very long mutual border with Iran, and a stable government there no matter who its leaders might be is valuable to them.

This might change. If it becomes obvious that the Shah is very vulnerable and that other forces might come into power, the Soviets might change their obvious posture. But that's the observation that we have now.

-31-

JIMMY CARTER, Interview with Members of the White House
Correspondents Association, December 7, 1978 (excerpt):

Q. Mr. President, we appreciate this breakfast, and I'd like to ask a question that I might not pose at a broader meeting. As a former Democratic Member of the House who voted for you and who spent 2 years at our embassy in Iran, I find it a little difficult to reconcile your statements about the Shah's concern for human rights, democracy, and liberalization with the pretty well documented record of his regime.

I think that those of us who have been there—and I'm going back tonight—could accept your policy a little better if you were to postulate it on the broader strategic and energy considerations. I'm wondering if you could enlighten us on that, both points, and anything else on the issue?

THE PRESIDENT. I'll try.

There are several basic premises on which our relationship with Iran is postulated. First of all, our bilateral relationships with Iran have been constructive for both countries. We consider the Iranian people's relationship with the West to be very important. Iran has been a stabilizing factor around the Persian Gulf. This stability is valuable in the region. It's valuable in the surrounding territory, reaching certainly as far as Israel and the Mediterranean, and it's important for world peace. Iran has been very helpful to us in economic matters concerning OPEC, and we have a good and longstanding relationship between Presidents, myself and my predecessors, and the Shah himself.

The Shah has attempted, in my opinion, while maintaining order in a very difficult period, to move toward social liberalization, sometimes directly in con-

flict with the desires of the more traditional religious leaders, and has on several occasions, increasingly, lately, offered to form coalition governments encompassing his political opponents there. These offers have been rejected.

I don't have any apology to offer for the difference in human rights values that our own Nation espouses and those that have been accomplished by the Shah in Iran. There have been abuses. There have been incarcerations of people without formal charge and trial under the Shah's government that would not be acceptable in our own country.

But I think the trend has been, under the Shah, toward democratic principles and social liberalization. Some have thought he moved too fast; some have thought he has moved not long enough—not strongly and rapidly enough, rather. And, of course, there have been instances when human rights violations have occurred as measured by any objective standard. But I might hasten to add that we have those kinds of violations in our own country as well.

Q. Mr. President, I was going to ask you about the Shah. Do you think he could survive now, and how?

THE PRESIDENT. I don't know. I hope so. This is something that is in the hands of the people of Iran. We have never had any intention and don't have any intention of trying to intercede in the internal political affairs of Iran.

We primarily want an absence of violence and bloodshed, and stability. We personally prefer that the Shah maintain a major role in the government, but that's a decision for the Iranian people to make.

PRESIDENT CARTER IN IRAN - DECEMBER 1977

ARRIVAL, TEHRAN,
DEC. 31<sup>st</sup>

His Imperial Majesty

Mr. President, on behalf of the
Shahbanou and myself and the Iranian
people, I welcome you, Mrs. Carter,
and your delegation on Iranian soil.

We cherish your arrival as the head
of state of a country with which Iran
always had unshakable bonds and the
best of relations and at the same time
as an exalted friend and a most es-
teemed guest.

We sincerely hope that you will take
back with you happy memories of your
short visit to our country, and in the
meantime we sincerely hope that all the
stages of your present trip will be
marked by the best of successes.

For the Shahbanou and I, it is a great pleasure to be your host only a few weeks after our trip to your country. Your distinguished personality, sincerity, good will, moral virtues, your hospitality, and also the kindness of Mrs. Carter have remained close to our hearts.

On behalf of all the people of Iran,
welcome to our country.

President Carter

My own nation has been blessed this
year by an official visit of His Imperial
Majesty, the Shah, and by the
Shahbanou, Empress Farah. This was a

fine gesture of friendship. And we also
benefited from extensive discussions
between the Shah and myself of impor-
tant issues for Iran and for the United
States. I am proud and pleased to be
able to come to Iran at the end of this
year, my first year in office, and, I be-
lieve, your 37th year as a leader of this
great nation and to begin another new
year with our close friends and allies.

In these times of endings and begin-
ings, I look forward to consulting
with the Shah about two of the issues
that have most dominated our thoughts
in the year just past and will require
our best actions in the years ahead.

One is finding solutions to the eco-
nomic problems of the world's rich and
the world's poor. None of these prob-
lems is more important than that of
energy. Neither producer nor consumer
nations can survive and prosper if we
recklessly exhaust the world's limited
supplies of oil, and neither group of na-
tions can solve the problem without the
cooperation of the other. It is because
my nation takes this problem seriously
that we are determined soon to have a
comprehensive energy plan designed to
eliminate waste and to develop alter-
nate sources of energy supplies. We are
cooperating closely with Iran, and it is
because I respect the leadership of the
Shah in this area that I have come to
him for consultation and for advice.

The other great issue is bringing
peace to the troubled areas of the world
and turning back the rising tide of ar-
maments and dissension. The Shah and
I share the hope that peace will come
soon to the Middle East and that as our
military alliance remains unshakable,
we may help to reduce the level of ten-
sion and armaments throughout the
world.

The interests of our nations are built
on the interests of individuals. And in
all of our discussions, both public and
private, we emphasize guaranteeing our
citizens the fullest economic and politi-
cal human rights.

I come with warm, personal feelings
for the leaders of Iran, and I bring best
New Year greetings from the United
States for the people of this great coun-
try.

Thank you very much, Your Majesty,
for this warm and hospitable welcome.

PRESIDENT CARTER - PRESS CONFERENCE - OCTOBER 10, 1978 (EXCERPTS)

Q. I'd like to ask you about Iran. How do we view the situation involving the Shah there now? Is he secure? How important is it to U.S. interests that the Shah remain in power? And what, if anything, can the U.S. Government do to keep him in power?

A. The strategic importance to our country—I think to the entire Western world—of a good relationship with a strong and independent Iran is crucial. We have historic friendships with Iran. I think they are a great stabilizing force in their part of the world. They are a very important trade partner. They've acted very responsibly.

My own belief is that the Shah has moved aggressively to establish democratic principles in Iran and to give a progressive attitude toward social questions, social problems. This has been the source of much of the opposition to him in Iran.

SECRETARY VANCE - NEWS CONFERENCE - NOVEMBER 3, 1978

Q. Last night on public television your (Iran) desk officer, Henry Precht, appeared, and he reported that there were quiet talks going on between the Shah and some of the moderate opposition leaders to achieve a compromise, and that these talks involve political and economic issues. I wonder what you could tell us about those talks and what the prospects are that they might achieve some sort of stability there?

A. Let me say a few words about Iran and the situation in Iran, and then I will speak briefly to your question.

Iran over the past decade has made a very important contribution to the stability of the Middle East. The United States has worked very closely with the Shah, and Iran is a close and valued ally.

Iran has recently reached a stage in its development where the Shah has believed it is essential to broaden participation in the political life of Iran, and we have supported this plan of liberalization.

The continuing violence and the strikes in Iran are a serious problem for the government, and we fully support the efforts of the Shah to restore order while continuing his program of liberalization. And we hope that everyone in Iran will recognize that continuing turmoil and destruction serve no one's interest.

As to the specific question that you raise, this is an internal question as to what the exact nature of the discussions are and a question which I think should be addressed by the Iranians rather than by the United States.

Q. Could you explain how the United States believes that it will be possible for you, at one and the same time, to restore order and continue liberalization?

A. I think that they are not at all inconsistent. I think that law and order can be restored. I think at the same time one can continue along the course which the Shah has charted for himself and for his nation. As you know, he has set forth a plan which would lead

to elections in the year 1979: and there is no inconsistency in reestablishing stability within the nation and moving on subsequently to the holding of elections according to his liberalization plan.

PRESIDENT CARTER - INTERVIEW FOR "BILL MOYERS' JOURNAL" (EXCERPTS)

ON NOVEMBER 13, 1978

President Carter held an interview with Bill Moyers in the Oval Office on November 13, 1978, for broadcast later that evening on the Public Broadcasting System.¹

A. We look on the Shah, as you know, as a friend, a loyal ally, and the good relationship that Iran has had and has now with ourselves and with the other democracies in the world, the Western powers, as being very constructive and valuable. Also, having a strong and independent Iran in that area is a very stabilizing factor, and we would hate to see it disrupted by violence and the government fall with an unpredictable result. The Shah has been primarily criticized within Iran because he has tried to democratize the country and because he's instituted social reforms in a very rapid fashion.

A. That's exactly right. I think the Shah has had that criticism, sometimes perhaps justified—I don't know the details of it. But I think there's no doubt that Iran has made great social progress and has moved toward a freer expression of people. Even in recent months, for instance, the Shah has authorized or directed, I guess, the Parliament to have all of its deliberations open and televised, something that we don't even do in our country here.

A. I hope not. I don't know what will come eventually. I would hope that a coalition government could be formed rapidly. At the present time, there's a quasimilitary government. The Shah has reconfirmed his commitment to have open and democratic elections, maybe within 6 months or 8 months. I hope that would be possible.

A. No, we don't try to interfere in the internal affairs of Iran.

A. I think that's a decision to be made by the people of that country.

A. We don't have any inclination to be involved in the internal affairs of another country unless our own security should be directly threatened, and that's a philosophy that I have espoused ever since I've been in the national political realm.

A. No, we have made it clear through my own public statements and those of Secretary Vance that we support the Shah and support the present government, recognizing that we don't have any control over the decisions ultimately made by the Iranian people and the stability of that region; the absence of the success of terrorism, of violence, the anarchy that might come with the complete disruption of their government is a threat to peace.

This might change. If it becomes ob-

PRESIDENT CARTER - INTERVIEW WITH MEMBERS OF WHITE HOUSE
CORRESPONDENTS' ASSOCIATION - DECEMBER 7, 1978

QUESTIONS

IRAN

Q. Mr. President, we appreciate this breakfast, and I'd like to ask a question that I might not pose at a broader meeting. As a former Democratic Member of the House who voted for you and who voted 2 years at our embassy in Iran, I find it a little difficult to reconcile your statements about the Shah's concern for human rights, democracy, and liberalization with the pretty well documented record of his regime.

I think that those of us who have been there—and I'm going back tonight—could accept your policy a little better if you were to postulate it on the broad strategic and energy considerations. I'm wondering if you could enlighten us on that, both points, and anything else on the issue?

THE PRESIDENT. I'll try.

There are several basic premises on which our relationship with Iran is postulated. First of all, our bilateral relationship with Iran have been constructive for both countries. We consider the Iranian people's relationship with the West to be very important. Iran has been a stabilizing factor around the Persian Gulf. This stability is valuable in the region. It's valuable in the surrounding territory, reaching certainly as far as Israel and the Mediterranean, and it's important for world peace. Iran has been very helpful to us in economic matters concerning OPEC, and we have a good and longstanding relationship between Presidents, myself and my predecessors, and the Shah himself.

The Shah has attempted, in my opinion, while maintaining order in a very difficult period, to move toward social liberalization, sometimes directly in conflict with the desires of the more traditional religious leaders, and has on several occasions, increasingly, lately, offered to form coalition governments encompassing his political opponents there. These offers have been rejected.

Q. Mr. President. I was going to ask you about the Shah. Do you think he could survive now, and how?

Q. Do you think there's still any chance that he'll form a civilian coalition government?

THE PRESIDENT. I think he has offered that publicly. And as you know, yesterday, I believe, he released two of his top political opponents. And I think, I would guess, surmise, that one of the reasons for those political leaders being released was to encourage them and their followers to join in some form of coalition government. That's the Shah's desire that's expressed to me personally by him and through his own Ambassador here, and I take him at his word.

PRESIDENT CARTER - PRESS CONFERENCE - DECEMBER 12, 1978

## IRAN

Q. Mr. President, what will be the domestic and international effect if the Shah fails to maintain power in Iran?

THE PRESIDENT. I fully expect the Shah to maintain power in Iran and for the present problems in Iran to be resolved. Although there have been cer-

tainly deplorable instances of bloodshed which we would certainly want to avoid, or see avoided, I think the predictions of doom and disaster that came from some sources have certainly not been realized at all. The Shah has our support and he also has our confidence.

We have no intention of interfering in the internal affairs of Iran, and we have no intention of permitting others to interfere in the internal affairs of Iran. The difficult situation there has been exacerbated by uncontrolled statements made from foreign nations that encourage bloodbaths and violence. This is something that really is deplorable, and I would hope would cease after this holy season passes.

I think it's good to point out that the Iranian people for 2,500 years, perhaps as long as almost any nation on Earth, have had the ability for stable, self-government. There have been changes in the government, yes, sometimes violence, but they have a history of an ability to govern themselves. And because of that and other factors which I've just described, I think the situation in Iran will be resolved successfully.

PRES. & MRS. CARTER'S INTERVIEW WITH BARBARA WALTERS - DECEMBER 14, 1978

## IRAN

Ms. WALTERS. Mrs. Carter, I hate for us to have to jump from one part of the world to the other, but we have less than an hour in which to talk.

So often when the news comes in about Iran, I remember New Year's Eve, because you and the President spent New Year's Eve in Iran and many reporters like myself were with you. And the President, in his toast at that time, said Mrs. Carter had said this is where she wanted to be New Year's Eve, with the Shah and Empress.

I wonder if you personally have talked with them and what your view is of them, of the Shah in particular, as a ruler?

MRS. CARTER. I have not talked with them, but I've had correspondence back and forth with Empress Farah. I think they need our support now more than ever. I just feel very concerned about the situation. We had a wonderful visit with them last year. And New Year's Eve was special, because after all the formalities and the dinner, we relaxed with them and with their friends and with a lot of you all, and just enjoyed being there.

THE PRESIDENT. And King Hussein was there.

MRS. CARTER. King Hussein was there. And it was a fun evening for us, and it's sad that this has happened in the period of 1 year's time.

Ms. WALTERS. Mr. President, there are reports that you've recently sent messages to the Soviet Union, warning them to keep hands off of Iran. Can you confirm these, and can you tell us if you have any information on Russian involvement in Iran?

THE PRESIDENT. Yes, that's accurate.

Ms. WALTERS. You have sent the letters?

THE PRESIDENT. Yes. President Brezhnev and I exchanged messages.

Ms. WALTERS. Recently?

THE PRESIDENT. Within the last few weeks, a couple of weeks. And I made it very clear to them, to the Soviets, that we have no intention of interfering in the internal affairs of Iran and that we have no intention of permitting others to interfere in the internal affairs of Iran.

I think it's good to point out, Barbara, that Iran has a 2,500-year history of statecraft, of managing their own affairs properly. Obviously, they've had ups and downs, as we have in our own country. But there's a certain stability there, a certain inclination and capability of the Iranians to govern themselves that I think is a stabilizing factor. We don't know what changes will take place.

Ms. WALTERS. Have the Russians been involved, sir, that you know of?

THE PRESIDENT. As far as we know, they have not. We monitor the situation closely. Obviously, there is a communist party there, the Tudeh party, which perhaps is inclined to encourage violence or disruption in order to change the existing government. But the Shah is communicating with opposition leaders. He is committed to a broader base for the government. He is working toward democratic principles and social change. And he has been embattled lately. And we obviously support him fully.

Ms. WALTERS. When we talk about support, what do we mean today, 1978, post-Vietnam, by support? For example, if the Shah does fall, it threatens our oil supply, it threatens Israel's oil supply, it threatens Saudi Arabia, it threatens the whole Persian Gulf. At what point would support turn into action and what kind of action, if any?

THE PRESIDENT. I am not prepared to answer that question.

Ms. WALTERS. Because there is no answer, or because—

THE PRESIDENT. Well, the answer is difficult. But I think just conjecturing on something that's hypothetical like that, assuming all the catastrophes that might possibly occur in the Persian Gulf, is something on which I don't want to comment. I don't think it's going to happen. And if I were to surmise that if it happens, we would do this, it would be interpreted by some as an actual prediction by me that it's going to happen, and I don't think it's going to happen.

Ms. WALTERS. Is support primarily verbal support?

THE PRESIDENT. No. We have treaty agreements with Iran. We have strong defense agreements with Iran. We look on Iran, as do their neighbors, as being a stabilizing factor. Even the Soviet Union

shares a long border with Iran. I'm sure they want stability there on their border. Exactly the formation of the government—I can't speak for the Soviets, but I think that for world peace and for the Soviets, and for us, certainly for the entire Middle East-Persian Gulf region, a stability is desirable, and that's what we want, also.

10

Vance press Conf. Jan. 11, 1979

Department of State Bulletin

Q. You said in your opening statement that the Shah has said he planned to take a vacation and there would be a Regency Council put in his place. Do I take it that the United States concurs that this would be a good action by the Shah to take and, if so, how long do you expect him to be out of the country? Is it a temporary or is it a semipermanent thing?

A. On the first half of your question, the Shah has made this decision, we think it is a sound decision, and we concur in that decision.

As to the second half, how long will he be out of the country: I don't have that answer. That is a question the Shah himself will have to answer.

Q. Do we expect this Regency Council to be named today or tomorrow or soon, so that he can leave the country soon?

A. I think that the Regency Council will be named in the next few days.

Q. And he will leave the country after the Regency Council is named?

A. He has said that he will leave the country after having established the Regency Council.

Q. Several people have said that the security situation, the overall strategic situation, in the entire Indian Ocean-Persian Gulf region has deteriorated from the Western point of view. Obviously, the Saudi leaders have been publicly concerned and presumably the reason the F-15's are being sent to Saudi Arabia is because of this concern.

What is your view as to all the developments in that region—Afghanistan, Pakistan, that whole area? Is the West at a disadvantage now?

A. There are several elements that go into answering that question. First, as I pointed out a few moments ago, fundamental changes are taking place in the area in terms of economic modernization, social changes, and demands for wider political involvement. And those factors affect not only Iran, which I was referring to when I made

the statement, but to the region generally.

I think it does not help to oversimplify the problem that leads us away from realistic policies toward these problems. In this connection, I would point out that we have different countries here, and although you have common factors which affect these various countries, that does not mean that the problem is identical in each of these countries.

Our policy for over 30 years has been to work with the countries which are undergoing these profound changes and to try and help find constructive solutions to the problems which they face. Our policy is that no outside power should exploit this instability for its own purposes and for its own advantage. Each of the nations should have freedom to work out its own solutions to these problems without exploitation from any outside powers.

Our position remains that we will remain very close to the many friendly countries in this area, who share our concern, who wish to see stability, who wish to see the maintenance of independence, and wish to see security maintained in the area.

So that, taking into account all of these factors, I think that the policies which we are following are a sound policy and a policy which must be applied with care and precision. And we must not fall into the trap of accepting oversimplified generalities as applying to differing situations.

Q. Soviet President Brezhnev several weeks ago warned the United States not to interfere in the Iranian situation. The Soviet news agencies have indicated that some of the steps we have taken in the region, including our consultation with the Shah, including the planned movement of military aircraft, are, in effect, interference.

Have we had direct communication with the Soviet Government, with President Brezhnev, regarding the Iranian situation and steps we are taking? And do you feel that the Soviet Government feels that this constitutes interference on the part of the United States?

A. The answer is yes, we have had direct communication with the Government of the Soviet Union with respect to Iran on many occasions.

I think it goes without saying that it is our clear view that the consultations which we have been having and the actions which we have been taking with respect to the Iranian situation are not interference in any way whatsoever. They are merely cooperative efforts

## Secretary Vance Visits Europe

Secretary Vance departed Washington on December 20, 1978, for meetings with Soviet Foreign Minister Gromyko in Geneva (December 21-23) and with Egyptian Prime Minister Khalil and Israeli Foreign Minister Dayan in Brussels (December 23-24). Following is a statement by Secretary Vance upon his return to Washington on December 24.¹

Despite all the advances in international communication, there are still occasions when there is no substitute for face-to-face contact in dealing with difficult international problems.

This was true in dealing with two important issues fundamental to peace on my present trip—the regulation of the nuclear weapons competition with the Soviet Union and the continuing search for a peaceful solution to the problems of the Middle East.

In Geneva Mr. Gromyko and I and our colleagues were able to essentially reach agreement on most of the issues which had not yet been resolved. Both sides will do their best in order that the preparation for a signing of the final agreement may be completed in the nearest future. We shall be working vigorously through our Geneva delegations and through diplomatic channels

to resolve the remaining issues. We are conscious of the importance to peace that a SALT agreement be reached without delay, but we are not working against any deadline. And our prime concern is that the agreement be a sound one.

As we also announced yesterday, we have reached agreement in principle concerning a meeting between President Carter and President Brezhnev. The question of the timing of this meeting remains to be worked out in Washington with Moscow.

In the meetings in Brussels on the Middle East, direct contact with the representatives of Israel and Egypt proved once again to be helpful. Our purpose was to explore the nature of the next steps to be taken in the negotiations and not to get a date for the resumption of negotiations. We had a useful and full exchange of views with Prime Minister Khalil of Egypt and Foreign Minister Dayan of Israel. Each party will be reporting to his head of government and will then be back in touch with us to discuss views and next steps to be taken. ☐

¹Press release 468. Other press releases related to the visit are Nos. 461 of Dec. 20, 462 and 464 of Dec. 21, and 467 of Dec. 23.

March 1979

21

# THE PRESIDENT: America's Role in a Turbulent World

Address upon receiving an Honorary Doctor of Engineering degree from the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta on February 20.¹

I remember when I first came to Tech, the entire world was at war. Our nation was under attack on two fronts and was desperately gearing up for a total war effort that we had not known since we fought each other in the 1860's.

In 1942-43, it was not yet a time for victories for the United States nor for our allies, and many people feared that western democracies might be overwhelmed. We now face a very different world from the world in which I came of age. The old empires are gone, and the maps are covered with new and developing nations with names that we had then never heard.

But one thing has not changed as much as I had hoped. It is still a world of danger, a world in which democracy and freedom are still challenged, a world in which peace must be rewon day by day.

Too many people still lack the simplest necessities of life, and too many are deprived of the most basic human rights. As the events of recent days have shown, peace remains a fragile thing, vulnerable to assaults from all sides.

Disturbances in Iran, the western Indian Ocean, and in Southeast Asia are a challenge to our determination and our leadership. They underscore the importance of strength in our national defenses, wisdom in our diplomacy, and steadfastness in the pursuit of arms control and peace.

I want to speak to you today about America's purpose in this world of change and turbulence.

Ever since the end of the Second World War, the United States has been the leader in moving our world closer to a stable peace and genuine security. We have the world's strongest economy; we have the world's strongest military forces; and we share burdens of mutual defense with friends abroad whose security and prosperity are as vital to us as to themselves.

With our strong allies, we have succeeded in preventing a global war for more than one-third of a century—the longest period of general peace in modern times. And as President of the United States, I am determined to keep our nation at peace.

We help to sustain a world trading and monetary system that has brought greater prosperity to more of the world's people than ever before in history.

We are working to resolve conflicts among other nations so that each can develop its own future in independence and peace. And we have helped to maintain the conditions in which more than 100 new nations have come into being and in which human hope—and its fulfillment—has taken a revolutionary leap forward.

In short, we in the United States provide the bedrock of global security and economic advance in a world of unprecedented change and conflict. In such a world America has four fundamental security responsibilities:

* To provide for our own nation's strength and safety;

* To stand by our allies and our friends;

* To support national independence and integrity of other nations; and

* To work diligently for peace.

We do not oppose change. Many of the political currents sweeping the world express a desire that we share—the desire for a world in which the legitimate aspirations of nations and individuals have a greater chance for fulfillment.

The United States cannot control events within other nations. A few years ago, we tried this and we failed.

by the outsiders who seek not to advance human aims but rather to extend their own power and their own position at the expense of others.

## Iran

As I speak to you today, the country of Iran—with which we have had close relations for the last 30 years—is in revolution. It has been our hope that Iran could modernize without deep internal conflicts, and we sought to encourage that effort by supporting its government, by urging internal change toward progress and democracy, and by helping to provide a background of regional stability.

The revolution in Iran is a product of deep social, political, religious, and economic factors growing out of the history of Iran itself. Those who argue that the United States should or could intervene directly to thwart these events are wrong about the realities of Iran. So, too, are those who spout propaganda that protecting our own citizens is tantamount to direct intervention.

We have not and we will not intervene in Iran, yet the future of Iran continues to be of deep concern to us and to our friends and allies. It is an important nation in a critical part of the world; an immediate neighbor of the Soviet Union; a major oil producer that also sits beside the principal artery for

> If others interfere [in Iran], directly or indirectly, they are on notice that this will... affect our broader relationships with them.

But we recognized as inevitable that the uncertainty and the turmoil that come with change can have its darker side as well. We saw this in a senseless act of violence last week in Afghanistan, when a brave and good man—Ambassador Adolph Dubs—gave his life in the performance of his duty as a representative of the United States. As we meet here today at Georgia Tech—enjoying the blessings of freedom and peace—we must remember that we are indebted for those blessings to the sacrifice of men and women like Spike Dubs.

We also see the darker side of change when countries in turbulence provide opportunities for exploitation

most of the world's trade in oil. And it is still a significant potential force for stability and progress in the region.

Iran is a proud nation with a long history—more than 2,000 years—of struggle to establish and to guarantee its own freedom. The independence of Iran is also in our own vital interest and in the interest of our closest allies, and we will support the independence of Iran.

Out of today's turmoil, it is our hope that these troubled people will create a stable government which can meet the needs of the Iranian people and which can enable that great nation not only to remain independent but to regain its internal strength and balance.

22

Department of State Bulletin

We are prepared to support that effort as appropriate and to work with the Iranian Government and the people as a nation, which shares common interests and common aspirations with us.

But just as we respect Iran's independence and integrity, other nations must do so as well. If others interfere, directly or indirectly, they are on notice that this will have serious consequences and will affect our broader relationships with them.

## Middle East

At the same time, we are intensifying our efforts to promote stability throughout the Middle East so that the security and the independence of the nations of that part of the world will be maintained.

At my direction, the Secretary of Defense recently carried out comprehensive consultations in Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia concerning the security of that region. We are determined to work with these nations and with others to put the peaceful development of the region on a sound and a lasting foundation.

Recent disturbances in the region have underlined the need to work even more urgently toward peace between Israel and its Arab neighbors. To this end, Israeli and Egyptian negotiators—the Foreign Ministers of both countries—will return to Camp David tonight at the invitation of the United States.

They will be meeting with Secretary of State Cyrus Vance. And I myself will do whatever I can to promote the success of the Camp David negotiations. And if it should be necessary, and the parties show adequate flexibility, I will call another summit conference to work for peace. I urge all leaders throughout the Middle East to recognize the vital importance for their region for these talks to succeed.

## Southeast Asia

For us in the United States, any crisis in the Middle East has the most immediate and serious consequences. But we are also deeply concerned by what is happening now in Southeast Asia. The same principles of American policy apply: We support the independence and integrity of the regional nations; we will stand by our friends; and we will continue as a nation to work for peace.

Just in the last few weeks we have seen a Vietnamese invasion of Cambodia and, as a result, a Chinese frontier penetration into Vietnam. Both actions threaten the stability of one of the

world's most important and promising regions—Southeast Asia.

We have opposed both military actions. Let me outline very briefly the principles that govern our conduct.

First, we will not get involved in conflict between Asian Communist nations. Our national interests are not directly threatened, although we are concerned, of course, at the wider implications of what might happen in the future and what has been happening in the past.

We have been using whatever diplomatic and political means are available to encourage restraint on all parties and to seek to prevent a wider war. While our influence is limited because our involvement is limited, we remain the one great power in all the world which can have direct and frank discussions with all the parties concerned. For this reason, we have a useful and important role to play in the restoration of stability. We will continue our efforts, both directly with the countries involved and through the United Nations, to secure an end to the fighting in the region, to bring about a withdrawal of Vietnam forces from Cambodia and of Chinese forces from Vietnam, and to gain the restoration of the independence and integrity of all nations involved.

At the same time, we are continuing to express our deep concern that this conflict may widen still further—with

> ... we will not get involved in conflict between Asian Communist nations.

unforeseen and grave consequences for nations in the region and also beyond.

In any event, the United States is fully prepared to protect the vital interests of our people wherever they may be challenged. We are in close consultation with our friends and allies in the region, especially the members of the Association of South East Asian Nations—the ASEAN nations. Their continued stability and prosperity are of great importance to us.

The normalization of relations between the United States and the People's Republic of China is already an accomplished fact and will not be reversed. This was the simple, long overdue recognition of the reality of the government in Peking.

In the last few days, we have consulted directly with leaders around the

world—and with our own congressional leaders as well—about events both in the Middle East and Southeast Asia. The responsibilities that we face are serious, and they are shared by the Administration and the Congress, by our nation and our allies—and our common understanding and our adherence to a common cause are vital.

All of us know that the internal affairs of Iran or combat even among Communist nations is of concern to us. Many nations are troubled—even threatened—by the turmoil in Southeast Asia and in the Middle East. To stand by our friends and to help meet their security needs in these difficult times, I will consult with the Congress to determine what additional military assistance will be required. This added measure of support is crucial for stability throughout the Indian Ocean area. And let me repeat, in the Middle East, in Southeast Asia, and elsewhere in the world, we will stand by our friends, we will honor our commitments, and we will protect the vital interests of the United States, and you can depend on it.

## U.S. Security and SALT

As we face this immediate series of crises, we also look constantly to the broader needs of security. If we are to meet our responsibilities, we must continue to maintain the military forces we need for our defense and to contribute to the defense of our allies. This year, I have proposed a substantial real increase in the defense budget. The events of recent weeks underscore the responsibility of the Congress to appropriate these funds in full.

There must be no doubt that the people of the United States are fully prepared to meet our commitments and to back up those commitments with military strength.

Turmoil and crisis also underscore the vital needs to work wherever possible, to stabilize and to reduce competition in strategic nuclear weapons.

This effort has the same ultimate goals as does our strong defense: the goals of security, stability, and peace. In pursuit of these goals, our nation faces no more important task this year than the successful conclusion of a strategic arms limitation agreement.

Just as we work to support national independence and to aid our friends and allies in times of trial, we must work to regulate nuclear arms capable of threatening life throughout this planet. For a SALT agreement is a fundamental element of strategic and political stability in a turbulent world—stability which can provide the

March 1979

23

necessary political basis for us to con-
tain the kinds of crises that we face
today and to prevent their growing into
a terrible nuclear confrontation.

After more than 6 years of negotia-
tions, conducted by three different
Presidents, agreement has now been
reached on most of the major compo-
nents of a sound and verifiable SALT II
treaty.

The emerging agreement will estab-
lish for the first time equal numbers of
strategic arms for both sides. It will
thus reverse the Soviet's numerical ad-
vantage which was temporarily estab-
lished in the SALT I treaty of 1972,
when they had about a 40% built-in
negotiated advantage.

To reach these new levels, the
Soviets will be required to reduce their
overall number of strategic arms. Over
250 Soviet missiles or bombers—about
10% of their strategic forces—will
have to be destroyed or dismantled. At
the same time, because we are now
well below the agreed ceiling, we
could substantially increase our own
operational strategic forces.

The SALT II agreement will also
provide negotiated limits on building
new types of weapons and limits on the
improvement of existing ones—the
so-called qualitative arms race can be
controlled.

SALT II will limit the size of land-
based missiles and the number of
warheads that can be placed on them.
Without these limits, the Soviets could
vastly increase the number of warheads
on their large land-based missiles, with
grave implications to the strategic
balance.

SALT II will, therefore, contribute
to our ability to deal with the growing
vulnerability of our land-based mis-
siles. Without it, the Soviet Union
could continue to increase the number
of their warheads, tending to nullify
our effort to protect our missiles.

The agreement will also permit us
and our allies to pursue all the defense
programs that we believe might even-
tually be needed—the M-X missile;
the Trident submarine and its missiles;
air, ground, and sea-launched cruise
missiles; cruise missile carrier aircraft;
and a new penetrating bomber. These
would be permitted.

Thus SALT II would allow our own
prudent programs to move ahead and

also will place important limits on what
the Soviets might otherwise do. And
this SALT II agreement will be a basis
for further negotiations for additional
substantial cuts in the level of nuclear
armaments.

Without the SALT II agreement, the
Soviet Union could have nearly one-
third more strategic forces by 1985

cure, it is in our national interest to
pursue it, even as we continue compe-
tition with the Soviet Union elsewhere
in the world. Therefore, I will seek
both to conclude this new SALT
agreement and to respond to any Soviet
behavior which adversely affects our
interests.

To reject SALT II would mean that

The emerging [SALT II] agreement will establish for the first time equal numbers of strategic arms for both sides. . . . The agreement will also permit us and our allies to pursue all the defense programs that we believe might eventually be needed. . .

than with SALT II. We would, of
necessity, as a nation, match such a
buildup. The costs would be enor-
mous, the risks self-evident. And both
nations would wind up less secure.

The stakes in SALT are too high to
rely on trust. Any SALT II treaty that I
sign will be adequately verifiable,
using our own independent means of
guaranteeing Soviet compliance with
terms of the agreement.

SALT II will specifically forbid any
interference that would impede our
ability to verify compliance with the
treaty. Any effort on the part of the
Soviet Union to interfere with our ver-
ification activities would be a detecta-
ble violation of the agreement itself
and an early signal of any possible
cheating.

Finally, let me put this agreement in
the context of our overall relations with
the Soviet Union, and the turbulence
that exists in many parts of the world.
The question is not when SALT can be
divorced from this complicated con-
text. It cannot. As I have often said,
our relationship with the Soviet Union
is a mixture of cooperation and compe-
tition. And as President of the United
States, I have no more difficult and del-
icate task than to balance these two. I
cannot and I will not let the pressures
of inevitable competition overwhelm
possibilities for cooperation any more
than I will let cooperation blind us to
the realities of competition, which we
are fully prepared to meet.

Because this carefully negotiated and
responsible arms control agreement
will make the world safer and more se-

the inevitable competition in strategic
nuclear arms would grow even more
dangerous. Each crisis, each confron-
tation, each point of friction—as seri-
ous as it may be in its own right—
would take on an added measure of
significance and an added dimension of
danger for it would occur in an atmos-
phere of unbridled strategic competi-
tion and deteriorating strategic stabil-
ity. It is precisely because we have
fundamental differences with the
Soviet Union that we are determined to
bring this dangerous dimension of our
military competition under control.

In today's world, it is vital to match
the pursuit of ideals with the responsi-
ble use of force and of power. The
United States is a source of both—
ideals and power. Our ideals have in-
spired the world for more than two
centuries; and for three generations,
since World War II, our power has
helped other nations to realize their
own ideals.

The determination and strength of
purpose of the American people are
crucial for stability in a turbulent
world. If we stand together in main-
taining a steady course, America can
protect its principles and interest and
also be a force for peace. Americans
have always accepted the challenge of
leadership, and I am confident that we
will do so now. ☐

¹ Text from White House press release of Feb. 20, 1979 (opening paragraphs omitted).

4

Department of State Bulletin

# THE PRESIDENT: Remarks Before a
National Foreign Policy Conference

Remarks and question-and-answer session before a foreign policy conference for editors and broadcasters held at the Department of State February 22, 1979.¹

Before I take your questions this afternoon, I'd like to give you some of my own thoughts about the uses of American power in a changing and sometimes turbulent world.

Recent events, particularly in Iran and Southeast Asia, have touched off a national debate about what America's role should be in dealing with turbulence and in trying to guide inevitable change. We've been going through debates like this ever since our first President served—George Washington, whose birthday this happens to be.

Looking back over the last several years—particularly the last 2 years—I've been struck by the increasing complexity, however, of international affairs. I'm encouraged by what I judge to be a willingness on behalf of the American people to attempt to understand complex issues, not to oversimplify them, and to support policies and decisions that basically and openly address these complex issues responsibly and realistically.

Of course, there has never been any change in America's determination or our willingness to maintain a strong military capability or to promote the economic health and vitality of our country or to deal with and enhance the political and moral strength of our nation. Those commitments have always been constant and unswerving. But we must also see issues that are complex very clearly. And we must devise intelligent and thoughtful responses to them.

Neither of the two events that have been so newsworthy the last few weeks—turmoil in Iran, the conflict in Southeast Asia—were of our own making. But both events place great demands on me as President and on our ability to define and to act upon the true interests of the American people. And there are likely to be many more events like this in the future.

As the world becomes more complex, it's more important than ever before that we do not oversimplify events abroad. Bad analysis inevitably leads to bad policy. Instead, we need to be aware of the deep historical forces at work in other countries. We need to be

well-informed. The revolution in Iran, for example, is a product of Iranian social, political, economic, religious factors, all intertwined. To ignore these realities or fail to understand them would lead us into taking actions that might be ineffective or irrelevant or even dangerous.

But in addition to understanding the complexity of individual nations, we must also understand how changes taking place in those nations can affect the future, both of that particular region, the entire world, and especially my responsibility, the United States of America.

We need to resist two temptations: to see all change as inevitably against the interests of the United States, as kind of a loss for us or a victory for them; or to imagine that what happens in a country like Iran will not have consequences for us and for other regions as well. We need to see what is happening not in terms of simplistic colors, black and white, but in more subtle shades; not as isolated events, but often as part of sweeping currents that have broad significance.

At this moment there is turmoil or change in various countries from one end of the Indian Ocean to the other; some turmoil as in Indochina is the product of age-old enmities, inflamed by rivalries for influence by conflicting forces. Stability in some other countries is being shaken by the processes of modernization, the search for national significance, or the desire to fulfill legitimate human hopes and human aspirations.

For us in the United States, change itself is not the enemy. Our concern is twofold. We must work to dampen conflict, to maintain peace, and we must make clear that it's dangerous for outside powers to try to exploit for their own selfish benefits this inevitable turmoil. That kind of exploitation can damage not only the integrity and independence of the nations that happen to be in a transition phase but also can damage the effort to build a more secure and a more peaceful world for us all. Let me repeat what I said at Georgia Tech earlier this week: "... in the Middle East, in Southeast Asia, and elsewhere in the world, we will stand by our friends, we will honor our commitments, and we will protect the vital interests of the United States ..."²

The United States continues to be the most powerful nation on Earth—militarily, economically, and politically. And I'm committed to preserving and even enhancing that power, not for its own sake, but for the sake of the values and the ideals of our nation. We will make responsible use of that power where our interests are directly involved or where we can help to create conditions for peace and for the independent development of other nations and for the realization of the hopes of human beings who live there.

We have forces in readiness, as you well know, which we will use if necessary. I hope that that need will never rise. I am proud that no member of the Armed Forces of our country has had to give his life in combat during my Administration. And I'm determined to do all in my power to keep this precious peace. But let there be no mistake, our will and our determination are firm; our commitment to protecting our vital interest is unshakable. We must, therefore, be very clear about where our true interests lie.

In Iran, our interest is to see its people independent, able to develop, according to their own design, free from outside interference either by us or from any other power.

In Southeast Asia, our interest is to promote peace and the withdrawal of outside forces and not to become embroiled in the conflict among Asian Communist nations. And, in general, our interest is to promote the health and the development of individual societies, not to a pattern cut exactly like ours in the United States but tailored rather to the hopes and the needs and the desires of the peoples involved.

To these ends we will broaden our cooperation with our friends in the Middle East and Southeast Asia, supporting their efforts to maintain national stability and independence. We'll consult closely with Congress to determine the need for additional military aid in this troubled region of the Middle East, to be used where it can be most effective. And we have called and will call on our allies to help whenever they can or will, working in partnership with us.

We are working hard for peace between Israel and its neighbors and also in other troubled areas of the world. In the future, I feel sure that we will find demands on the United States to be in-

April 1979

creasing and not diminishing. We con-
tinue to bear the burdens of maintain-
ing a strong defense, of supporting tra-
ditional allies who depend upon us, and
working to reduce the spread of con-
ventional and nuclear weapons.

But we also face a twilight world of
change and sometimes of turmoil. We
will increasingly be called upon to deal
with events that do not represent basic
challenges to our security but still
which require the responsible use of
American influence and American
power.

We have the strength and the will to
act where need be, and I'm confident
that as a nation we have the wisdom to
act wisely.

That's my responsibility in brief
terms, a responsibility which you share
with me.

Q. I'd like to know what we're
going to do to insure the stability of
small oil-producing states in the
Middle East during this time of in-
stability in that part of the world?

A. I've just sent Secretary of Defense Brown into that region, as you know, to meet with the leaders of four nations: Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt, and Israel. We have the top officials of Oman here consulting these last few days with Secretary Vance. And in the Emirates, in Bahrain, and other small countries we've assured them that our influence, our power as a nation, will be used to preserve the basic security of that region free from any outside political or military power.

We are trying to bring them together
in a spirit of peace and harmony and a
recognition that their own national in-
dependence ought to be preserved by
them and also preserved by us.

As I said in my brief remarks earlier,
I am consulting with the Congress now,
based on the reports that Harold Brown
brought back, about how we might in-
crease to some degree our military as-
sistance efforts for those small coun-
tries that feel insecure, so that through
their own strength they might feel bet-
ter able to withstand any internal and
outside disturbances that are unwar-
ranted.

There are some nations that provide
major stabilizing efforts. Egypt is a
strong, powerful nation in the Arab
world; Israel's strength is part of our
own security. Iran, we hope and pray,
in the future will still be a factor for
stability in their region—in a different
character, obviously, than it was under
the Shah, but we hope will be inde-
pendent and determined to maintain
kind of a rock of stability in that re-
gion, impervious to outside influence
and attack.

Working with individual nations,
working collectively to reduce tensions
among them and making sure they have
adequate military capabilities, and
using our own influence to prevent
some major outside power from having
an inordinate influence—those are
some of the things that we can do.

The last one, obviously, is to try to
bring some peace between Israel and its
own neighbors. I think if the Arab
world, in a united way, working with
us, perhaps with Israel in a peaceful
pursuit, could face any outside disturb-
ance rather than to focus their animos-
ity, as it has been in the past, on Israel,
it would certainly be a very stabilizing
factor.

We derive great benefit from free access to oil from that region. Some of our allies and friends in Europe and Japan rely much more heavily, and we are trying to get them to use their own influence to parallel ours in maintaining the independence of individual nations and the stability therein.

There are a few instances in that re-
gion where economic aid—either
through direct grants, which are fairly
rare, or through guaranteed loans on a
multilateral basis or through interna-
tional lending institutions—can also
help. That's kind of a gamut of things
that we explore and use with varying
degrees of priority and emphasis.

Q. Many observers of the Middle
Eastern situation believe that the
failure of Egypt and Israel to sign the
Camp David agreements as originally
conceived this fall, and, in fact, the
subsequent delays in signing any
agreement, are directly related to the
lack of pressure by the United States
not on Israel and Egypt, but on Jor-
dan and Saudi Arabia to join the
talks or at least to lend support to the
negotiating process. Would you
please comment on this?

A. I think in a spirit of complete candor we have approached our limit on legitimate influence—perhaps even pressure in a proper way—on the countries in that entire region to support the Camp David accords and to participate in future discussions.

We have sent delegations to Jordan,
to Saudi Arabia, even this past week,
to encourage their tacit or public or ac-
tive support of these accords. And I've
used my own personal influence to a
maximum degree within the bounds of
propriety in the same pursuit.

As you know, my own involvement
in the Camp David negotiations has
been substantial. There is no other
single item that has addressed my at-
tention as President on which I've
spent more time, more effort, more

study, more prayer than to bring peace
between Israel and its neighbors. We
believe the Camp David accords are a
very firm and well-advised foundation
on which to predicate, first of all, an
agreement between Israel and Egypt,
combined with a comprehensive set-
tlement as part of the same procedure
that relates to Israel and its neighbors.
And whatever we can do—to use the
word again—within the bounds of
propriety, recognizing the independ-
ence of other nations, we have done,
are doing, and will do to bring about
peace between Israel and its neighbors.

Q. If the Soviet troops decide to
help Vietnam in their struggle, how
will this affect normalization and the
Taiwan question, which is also being
questioned as to its defenses?

A. The normalization of relations
between our country and the People's
Republic of China is an accomplished
fact. It will not be affected one way or
the other by combat among the Asian
Communist countries. We have used
every bit of influence that we could
with Vietnam, with China, with the
Soviet Union to bring about a with-
drawal of attacking forces whenever
they've crossed an international border
and to bring about an end to combat
there.

My hope is that this combat will
rapidly be concluded. And even today
we introduced to the United Nations a
request for a complete analysis or de-
bate of this question calling upon Viet-
nam to withdraw their troops after they
have invaded Kampuchea, and also
calling upon China to withdraw its
troops from Vietnam.

But I would say that the recognition
of the Peking government as the Gov-
ernment of China is already an accom-
plished fact and will not be abrogated
nor will there be any interference with
it.

Q. Some columnists and commen-
tators have come to regard the im-
plementation of your foreign policy
as a failure. They point specifically
to the lack of a clear direction, a
steady course. Aside from those
areas covered in your opening re-
marks, what do you think has
created that perception? Do you
think it's possible that you yourself
may have contributed to that prob-
lem? [Laughter]

A. I think that this allegation is to be
anticipated. It's not unexpected for us.

There is a marshaling of public sup-
port in almost every instance when a
President takes forceful action at a time
when our nation's security itself is
endangered—obviously, in time of a

5