International
New York City

TIMES
KANSAS CITY, MO.
M-335,000

FEB-9-79

Kissinger on SALT

LONDON—Henry Kissinger says the proposed U.S.-Soviet strategic arms limitation agreement won't work unless America recognizes the growth of Soviet military strength and Russia's recent record of aggressiveness.

The former secretary of state, in an interview with the Economist, said U.S. SALT negotiators must link the pact with "the total (Soviet-American) military and foreign policy relationship."

International
New York City

NEWSDAY
LONG ISLAND, N. Y.
E-460,000 S-370,000

FEB-17-79

Iran Turmoil Laid
To Nixon, Kissinger

London (AP)—Henry Kissinger bears "heavy responsibility" for the upheaval in Iran, says former Undersecretary of State George W. Ball.

The "two most conspicuous causes of the shah's debacle," Ball wrote in a letter to the news magazine Economist, were the heavy purchases of U.S. arms begun under the Nixon administration and the corruption of the shah and his circle.

Ball said he was responding to Kissinger's assertions in the weekly, that the United States did not support Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi strongly enough.

Ball, an administration consultant on Iran who was undersecretary during the Kennedy and Johnson administrations, said: "This costly burden [the arms purchases] resulted not only in . . . a financial squeeze that compelled cutbacks on construction, with resulting unemployment and disaffection; it also led the Shah to a megalomania that cut him off from all contact with reality and the Iranian people."

and pass, Carey would say. An influential Democratic reason they're going for

Distributor De

By Amanda Harris

The president of a Rochester firm said yesterday that statements made about the company in a recent Grumman Corp. audit, which detailed questionable payments made to promote aircraft sales overseas, represented a "frantic attempt to dignify . . . rumors."

James Wilmot, president of Page Airways Inc., also denied that the company was involved in questionable marketing practices. He made the statements in a letter sent to Grumman by his attorneys.

Page Airways is Grumman's domestic and overseas distributor of Gulfstream II jets. The audit, filed Feb. 8 as

part of an agreement and Extraordinary Compensation Committee, detailed a possible questionable involvement for also accused man John C. Flanagan, a mask questioner.

The report says employees believed the distributor change for a person who is Page's a substantial owner.

Wilmot's action was in the market for man products.

International
New York City

Asny

FEB 5-1979

# Kissinger Help Sought

© New York Times News Service, 1979

WASHINGTON — The Economist of London is now printing Henry Kissinger's extensive and mystifying views on the wisdom or otherwise of signing and ratifying a second strategic arms agreement with the Soviet Union.

Boiling it down, he seems to say that maybe he'd sign it and maybe he wouldn't, but in the process, this interview dramatizes the influential role Mr. Kissinger is still playing as a private citizen in the conduct of American foreign policy.

More important, it underscores a notion that has been gaining considerable support here in the Carter administration and in the Congress: namely, that when Kissinger finally makes up his mind, his testimony for or against SALT II might very well be decisive on how the Senate finally votes on the issue. No secretary of state and certainly no former secretary of state or United States senator in memory, past or present, has ever had such influence.

This, in a way, is Kissinger's revenge. He was brought out of Harvard by Nelson Rockefeller and put into office by Richard Nixon and villified in the presidential election campaign by Jimmy Carter, who is now appealing, almost pleading, for the Republicans to support his SALT II treaty, and needs Kissinger's help.

It's really not fair to talk about "Kissinger's revenge" because he isn't in a such a mood and has no reason to be so. He is one of the most important figures in the SALT debate because he has established himself as the most thoughtful public figure on foreign policy of our time and commands the respect of the foreign policy advisers in both parties. Knowing this, Kissinger is being very careful to avoid taking a position on the SALT II treaty for or against the president, or the divided members of the Republican Party.

"This SALT agreement," he told The Economist, "at best slightly limits existing weapons programs, and it contains within it many dangers.... It can perhaps be defended on the ground that it does not inhibit us from rectifying the imbalance which in the 1980s will face all the countries with the gravest dangers."

"I think," he added, "that at a minimum the ratification process should be used to put the Soviets on notice

james reston

that the Congress of the United States cannot accept the constant challenges to the international order." As for "how that might be achieved," he said, "I want to reserve for the ratification debate."

Kissinger told The Economist that he was concerned about the balance of power in the 1980s and wanted to be sure that the Carter administration understood the dangers.

"The administration," he added, "has an obligation not to sell SALT with the argument that by itself it will usher in an era of peace. If my analysis of the 1980s is even approximately correct," he concluded, "we will enter an era of grave danger."

There is no dispute this. The administration agrees. It also agrees with Kissinger that the proposed SALT agreement "at best slightly limits existing weapons." There is really no difference between them on this and most of Kissinger's other points. The only difference is that Kissinger, the private citizen, is defining the issue on the television, in interviews and in influential publications of the world, and the Carter administration is not.

What Kissinger doesn't analyze in The Economist or any other interview is what the consequences would be if the Senate, after six years of negotiation including his own, rejected Carter's SALT II treaty. SALT II has not yet been completed, let alone signed. and Kissinger is waiting for the critical last-minute amendments before saying what in the end he would do.

The bet here is that he would approve the treaty with doubts and reservations, but that he will go along and take a decisive margin of the doubting Republicans and Democrats with him.

Meanwhile, his views will be sought here and abroad, in the press, by leaders of the executive and by Congress, by foreign ambassadors and candidates for the Republican nomination for the presidency, on the Today Show and on the Tonight Show and even by Jimmy Carter.

All the people who were for Kissinger in the past, and even those who were against him and still are — quite a few — concede the point. He remains in the cat-bird seat, the most influential outside-insider of our time.

International
New York City

SUN-TIMES
CHICAGO, ILL.
M-565,000 S-670,000

FEB-9-79

36 world/nation . Chicago Sun-Times, Friday, February 9, 1979

Kissinger hits U.S. on Iran

By Bernard D. Nossiter

Washington Post Special

LONDON—Henry A. Kissinger has accused the Carter administration of promoting revolution in Iran by failing to give the shah unequivocal support and by “placating” human rights advocates in the heart of a crisis.

The former secretary of state made these judgments in an interview to be published here Friday by the Economist magazine.

Kissinger never mentioned the Carter administration by name and speaks only of "American" policies. His language is often vague, but his remarks are clear enough to provide fellow Republicans and other administration foes with the intellectual framework for a "Who lost Iran?" campaign.

"WHAT TURNED THE inchoate unrest into a revolution," Kissinger said, "was the conjunction of modernization, lack of political imagination by the shah, American policies, demonstrations of American weakness and assaults on American institutions perceived by those countries as essential for their survival. And clumsy tactical handling of the situation."

Kissinger did not describe the institutions subjected to assaults.

Kissinger's sharpest criticism was directed

at Washington's insistence that Mohammed Reza Shah Pahlavi reform the imprisonment and torture of political opponents.

Kissinger suggested that "a sophisticated human rights policy" is useful to deflate opposition before a crisis develops. But "in dealing with revolutionary situations, it can be inflammatory. In Iran our human rights policy has contributed to instability."

KISSINGER ALSO SAID "our statements of support" for the shah "had no practical consequence and their operational content always had a caveat that in fact tended to encourage those who were fomenting unrest."

Among other things, he traced the shah's overthrow to the "emasculation" of the Central Intelligence Agency. Had the agency been spared press and congressional inquiry and congressional curbs on its activity, he asserted, its very "mystique" might have deterred the shah's foes.

Kissinger was surprisingly blunt about the use of armed military intervention.

He was asked, "Do you include the willingness to use military force to uphold a particular regime?"

"We surely should not exclude it publicly," he replied, "though, of course, it can only be a last resort."

GET STORE

AKEHURST • FORD CITY • RANDHURST • OAK PARK

THDAY SALE

22% to 25% OFF

misses' spring fashion
coordinates

long sleeve shirts

regular 11.97

8.77

Pull your early spring wardrobe together beautifully with fashion look of Irish Coffee. Cool crisp natural colors in easy care Visa® textured polyester. Sizes 10 to 18.

International
New York City

FEB-16-79

OWENS

How Super K Would Have 'Saved' Iran

There will be some sort of a "who lost Iran?" debate after all. Henry Kissinger has seen to that.

Super-kraut, the munchkin Metternich, was into the breach last week, alleging that "weakness" in the incumbent American government—i.e., the post Nixon-Ford, post-Kissinger government—had helped bring on the Iranian deluge.

"What turned the inchoate unrest into a revolution was the conjunction of modernization, lack of political imagination by the shah, American policies, demonstrations of American weakness and assaults on American institutions perceived by these countries as essential for their survival. And clumsy tactical handling of the situation." All this, and some more, in an interview in The Economist of London.

Some people never learn. Super-kraut was even at least semi-ready to ship in the Marines:

Q: "Do you include the willingness to use military force to uphold a particular regime?"

A: "We surely should not exclude it publicly, though of course it can only be a last resort."

There is a fine, fey lunacy here. Domestic criticism and congressional examination has humbled the Central Intelligence Agency, the man says, depriving it of a "mystique" that

might, in and of its wispy self, have been sufficient to anchor the shah and terrorize the revolutionaries into quiescence. This is the bottom line on the hidden hand: We must not announce that the emperor's flatfeet have no clothes because naked bogeymen are not really very terrifying.

And furthermore, U.S. harping on the shah's abuse of his opponents had been "inflammatory" at a time of crisis.

Implicit in all this is a venerable assumption that Kissinger has not in-

vented, only debased further. This is the old Acheson-Dulles dogma that the world is a U.S. footstool and that the American government possesses some sort of divine right to order Iran's affairs to suit the big oil companies.

It was just such perceptions by an earlier generation of crackpots that provoked the "who lost China?" debate, starting in 1949, and the "what-are-those-commies-doing-90-miles-off-our-shores?" racket 10 years later. Much of the American history of the past 30 years has pivoted around such questions. They made Joe McCarthy

and Richard Nixon and, at one remove, Henry Kissinger. Well, the merry-go-round is about to roll again, but it surely will attract fewer joy riders this trip.

Iran has "fallen"—that is, she has been claimed from an oppressive despot by the Iranians themselves—just at the time in history when the China debate has been brought to a satisfactory conclusion in the Great Pan-Pacific Joint Anti-Soviet Alliance and Mutual Prosperity Coalition. More or less simultaneously, two hardline anticommunist Cuban refugees have been convicted in a U.S. court of murdering Orlando Letelier, a Chilean diplomat who had survived a successful Kissinger operation, the overthrow by a Chilean military junta of the democratically elected government of Salvador Allende Gossens, a democratic Marxist who offended the American corporations. Letelier was hellbent on telling the world what he knew about the putsch and its aftermath. CIA involvement in the Letelier murder is, inevitably, widely speculated and, also perhaps inevitably, entirely unproved.

Whatever the facts, Letelier's extermination was just the sort of venture that Kissinger's philosophy requires: No realpolitiker can make an omelette without breaking a few democrats.

Despite Kissinger's strictures, the Carter administration had diverged very little from what can be called the Kissinger-Rockefeller approach to Iran. There was, to be sure, that human rights afflatus. It had no calculable heft but it is pleasant to imagine that some poor goatherd outside Isfahan heard on some mysterious grapevine that President Jimmy Carter had come out strong against the old bastinado, and had been thus emboldened to seek out a prominent wall and there chalk anti-shah slogans. A pleasant thought but not, I fear, quite realistic. Innocents abroad do not believe in the policy pronouncements of American presidents. American foreign policy is made by fools and cynics, and believed in by cynics.

No one in the Carter faction is fool enough to talk as Kissinger talks. But we may be sure that the Carter foreign policy people retain the Kissinger—or Standard Oil—perspective.

At the center of this perspective is the assumption that the American national interest conflicts hopelessly with that of the people of Iran, of Chile and of everywhere else, not entirely excluding Commack, L.I., and Truth or Consequences, N.M. It follows that each country needs some sort of a despot, booted and spurred from American ordnance, to ride herd on its habitants.

Patrick Owens is a Newsday columnist.

VESTED SUITS
values to $200
$45-$55-$65

QUAD SUITS
values to $175
$66

LUXURIOUS
SPORTCOATS
values to $85
$25-$35

FINE SLACKS
values to $40
$9-$12

SUBURBANS &
CAR COATS
values to $95
$29-$39

OVERCOATS
values to $200
$69

RAINCOATS
values to $85
$27

LEATHERS & SUEDES
values to $175
$49

DRESS & SPORT SHIRTS
values to $30
$5-$8

FAMOUS NAME
SWEATERS
values to $45
$8-$10-$12

DESIGNER NECKWEAR
values to $20
$3

SHORT SLEEVE SHIRTS
values to $20
$4

BIG 'N TALL DEPT.

SUITS
values to $200
$69

QUAD SUITS
values to $195
$88

SPORTCOATS
values to $115
$49

SHIRTS & SWEATERS
values to $30
$10

NBO

national brands

HOURS: 10 TIL 10 DAILY 11 TIL 5 SUNDAY

OUTLET

CARLE PLACE, L.I. — Old Country Rd & Glen Cove Rd

QUEENS — 63rd Rd & Queens Blvd

OTHER NBO LOCATIONS:

CLIFTON—525 Route 46 • PARAMUS—Route 4 • N. PLAINFIELD—533 Route 22

YONKERS—1900 Central Ave. • WESTPORT—877 Post Road East

Swindler, Radler, House help. Harden, the President, yet neither Justice Department, note to the attorney general.

the man who admitted taking $10,000 to help Vesco.

● An Atlanta grand jury has been digging into Bert Lance's bewildering banking practices. The prosecutors have found a host of dubious deals, questionable loans, unsecured notes and huge overdrafts. The biggest borrower from Lance's National Bank of Georgia was the Carter peanut business.

● First Brother Billy Carter refused to answer questions, pleading the Fifth Amendment, about a questionable $1 million loan to the family peanut works from Lance's bank. But the loan, which was improperly secured and may have been misused, was actually arranged by Jimmy Carter.

● Lance initiated new lending policies to accommodate the Carter agri-business. He approved a $3-million line of credit to the Carter warehouse in 1975, expanding it to $6 million in 1976, and permitted the Carters to write overdrafts that reached as high as $500,000.

● Labor leader Joseph Tonelli paid $50,000 to two Atlanta attorneys, Irwin Stolz and W. Homer Drake, to keep him from being indicted. Stolz left his footprints all over Washington, from the White House to the Justice Department. Justice Department sources say the indictment was delayed five months, but Tonelli ended up pleading guilty to embezzlement and obstruction of justice.

Powerful senators, meanwhile, are pushing for the appointment of Warren Christopher as the next attorney general. Now deputy secretary of state, he served as deputy attorney general in the late 1960s.

At that time, he wrote: "Our whole philosophy has been that you have to de-politicize this operation as much as possible... Once the Justice Department becomes political, of course, the mission of justice must suffer."

International
New York City

JEWISH WEEK
WASHINGTON, D. C.
W-20,000

FEB-15-79

Kissinger blames administration
for Iran upset; sees peril ahead

LONDON (JTA)—Former Secretary of State Dr. Henry Kissinger, charged here that President Carter's weak foreign policy helped to trigger the revolution against the Shah of Iran, and could set back an Arab-Israeli peace agreement and shatter U.S. influence in the Middle East.

Kissinger's views appeared in a lengthy interview in the *Economist*, the London weekly foreign affairs magazine.

He says that the shah had been "demoralized" by doubts about American support and that ill-timed emphasis on human rights violations in Iran had helped to make a "catastrophe" there inevitable.

On the Egyptian-Israeli deadlock, Kissinger denies that Israel is wholly to blame, and suggests it was wrong to link the West Bank location so closely to the conclusion of an Egypt-Israel agreement.

Following the shah's removal, Kissinger said, there would be a change in the balance of power in the Middle East in favor of radical forces "in ways not yet fully foreseeable." It would give Iraq and other radical states a freer hand and countries like the Arab oil emirates would be increasingly threatened.

Kissinger continued: "We cannot resign from the problem by renouncing the role of policeman...we need a visible presence of

American power in the Indian Ocean...we must develop a political program that the Saudis and other threatened countries can believe in." This included giving help to Turkey to keep her from "sliding into chaos."

American policy in the Persian Gulf would also have a crucial impact on the prospects for the Camp David agreement, he said. "The policy of Saudi Arabia, or Jordan, toward Camp David will grow out of their assessment of the momentum behind the radical trend in the area and of our ability to staunch it."

If Camp David failed, Kissinger added, it would be perceived as a sign that the United States were incapable of shaping events.

In the case of Syria, and perhaps also for Iraq, what was needed, he said, was "a balance of incentives that makes it clear that we still are a decisive factor in the area. If that is lost, no amount of Arab-Israeli negotiations in the abstract can avert the advance of radicalism."

Kissinger agreed with the interviewer that Israel had resisted signing the agreement of Camp David, but, he said, Israel was willing to sign if she can overcome her fear as to what would happen on the West Bank. "It may have been a mistake to be too specific about a West Bank solution in the context of the Egyptian treaty," Kissinger said.

VISA

gifts and helpful services
hard-to-find special

Use your charge card for subscription orders

Three years $30

Two years $22

One year $12

The Jewish Week

774 National Press Building

Washington, D.C. 20045

Name

Address

City

State

ZIP

Gift of

(Name to appear on gift card)

I enclose $

Please charge $

( ) Central Charge

( ) Visa/ Bank Americard

( ) Master Charge

Card No.

(exp. date)

International
New York City

BULLETIN
PROVENCE, R. I.
E-145,000

FEB-9-79

# Kissinger criticizes Carter's Iran stand

Washington Post

LONDON — Henry Kissinger has accused the Carter administration of promoting revolution in Iran by failing to give the shah unequivocal support and by "placating" advocates of human rights in the heart of a crisis.

The former secretary of state makes these judgments in an interview published today by the Economist magazine.

Kissinger insists that the United States cannot abandon its role as "policeman" and must be willing to use force as a last resort to prop up friendly foreign regimes.

Among other things, he traces the shah's overthrow to the "emasulation"

of the Central Intelligence Agency. Had the agency been spared press and congressional inquiry and congressional curbs on its activity, he asserts, its very "mystique" might have deterred the shah's foes.

Kissinger calls the shah "our closest ally in that area for 37 years."

"What turned the inchoate unrest into a revolution was the conjunction of modernization, lack of political imagination by the shah, American policies, demonstrations of American weakness and assaults on American institutions perceived by those countries as essential for their survival. And clumsy tactical handling of the situation."

Group
carcoa
tanned
arrived

NOW
89.95

NOW
59.95

Men's Sheepskin Coat. Compare at $270.00.
Now $169.95.

NOW OPEN THURS. & FRI. TIL 9 PM

SNYDER LEATHER
FACTORY OUTLET

708 ELMWOOD AVE. PROVIDENCE, R.I. 467-4230

Rte. 195 South to Exit 17. Turn right.

MONDAY-WEDNESDAY 10-6 • THURSDAY-FRIDAY 10-9

SATURDAY 9-5

MASTERCHARGE • VISA • LAYAWAY

International
New York City

JEWISH EXPONENT
PHILADELPHIA, PA.
W-65,000

Asني

FEB 16 1979

Return to Camp David

There will be a new sense of urgency when Israeli Foreign Minister Moshe Dayan, Egypt's Foreign Minister Mustapha Khalil and U.S. Secretary of State Cyrus R. Vance sit down at Camp David to begin the renewed quest for the elusive Israeli-Egyptian peace treaty.

Events of recent weeks make that quest more important than the September, 1978, attempt by President Anwar Sadat and Prime Minister Menahem Begin to impose a Dec. 17 deadline on the signing of a treaty.

THE "NERVOUS NEUTRALS" TO THE diplomatic poker game — Jordan and Saudi Arabia — and the rejectionist states in Mideast crescent and the strife-torn nations of Africa all watched, all waited while the parties agreed to disagree.

Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini has declared an Islamic republic, which he says will keep the oil taps cut off.

Retired Lt. Gen. Daniel O. Graham, one-time head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, called the turmoil in Iran a "disaster for U.S. strategic interests."

SPEAKING BEFORE THE Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith, Graham predicted a second revolution in Iran within two years that will see a PLO-type overthrow and further expansion of the Soviet ring of steel now belting the Mideast which includes influence in Syria, Iraq, Ethiopia, Afghanistan, South Yemen and the Soviet Indian Ocean fleets.

The grim threat of Russian encirclement was on U.S. Defense Secretary Harold Brown's mind this week on his four-nation tour of Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Israel and Egypt, with arms paramount on his list of topics. In Israel, he was to discuss the air bases in the Negev that will replace the two Israel will lose when she cedes Sinai to Egypt.

AMERICAN INTERESTS IN achieving a new Mideast stability based on a solid Israeli-Egyptian rapprochement was best put this week by former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger in an interview with the British weekly *The Economist*. Kissinger warned the U.S. must learn the lesson of Iran and change its policy toward Saudi Arabia and other Persian Gulf states to account for political and social changes there.

"All of us," Kissinger said, "paid insufficient attention in Iran to the proposition that political construction should go side by side with economic construction."

It is hoped here that all parties at Camp David will return to the conference table with a new determination to make the spirit of Camp David succeed at long last.

International

New York City

COURIFR-EXPRESS
BUFFALO, N. Y.
M-125,000 S-270,000

Asny

FEB-10-79

# Brown Leaves For Mideast To Assure Support

WASHINGTON (Reuter) - Defense Secretary Harold Brown had a final briefing session with President Carter Friday before flying to the Middle East to allay fears on U.S. commitments in the area in view of developments in Iran.

Brown left Andrews Air Force Base near Washington for Saudi Arabia, first stop on a nine-day trip that will also take him to Jordan, Israel and Egypt.

The main purpose of the visit, which officials hope will calm concern arising out of Iran's turmoil, is also seen as a signal to Moscow that the Middle East is vital to U.S. interests.

Brown travelled by helicopter to Andrews fresh from a breakfast meeting with the president, Secretary of State Cyrus Vance and national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski before going to the base to board his Air Force jet.

## Details Lacking

No details of the White House meeting were announced but officials said Brown was visiting the Middle East as the president's personal representative and might have personal messages from him for leaders of the countries he is visiting.

One of his tasks on the journey will be to make an on-the-spot assessment of the latest power alignments in the area.

Brown, the first U.S. Defense Secretary to visit Saudi Arabia, begins this three days of talks there today. Leaders he will meet include King Khalid and Crown Prince Fahd, who is due to visit the United States next month to meet Carter.

## To See Begin

In Jordan he will see King Hussein and in Israel leaders he will meet include

Prime Minister Menachem Begin, Foreign Minister Moshe Dayan and Defense Minister Ezer Weizman.

The final meeting of his tour will be with President Anwar Sadat in Cairo.

While regional stability in the area will be the primary topic of Brown's talks, also certain to come up will be the Middle East peace moves begun at the Camp David summit last September and stalled since then by Israeli-Egyptian differences of interpretation.

Coinciding with Brown's trip was a call by former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger for a visible U.S. presence in the Indian Ocean to make up for the declining power of Iran.

## Kissinger Interview

In an interview published in the respected independent British weekly journal, The Economist, Dr. Kissinger said the United States must develop a political program in which Saudi Arabia and other countries in the area can believe in.

Dr. Kissinger said the United States must convince Saudi Arabia and other countries in the Gulf that its policy would enable them to survive as they wanted to.

If countries concluded that at critical moments "we will deal similarly with them" as the United States did with the Shah of Iran, "they will seek reinsurance in Moscow or Baghdad now," he warned.

More Help on t

The State Health Department has authorized the temporary relocation of 30 to 40 more families from Niagara Falls' polluted Love Canal area. Affected are pregnant women and families with children under two years old, and they are part of 250 families in a six-block area surrounding the canal. They will be given temporary housing, unlike the 239 families permanently relocated earlier from the two inner rings immediately adjacent to the canal.

While we can understand the emotional response of some of the residents who feel that they, too, should be relocated, the relocation decision was based on scientific medical study. And that is exactly what such decisions should be based on. In announcing the decision, Dr. David Axelrod, state health commissioner, said that a department study had found higher-than-expected pregnancy problems among residents of the affected "wet areas" section.

Meanwhile, Rep. John J. LaFalce, D-Town of Tonawanda, in seeking more aid from Washington, said the latest disruption of the canal neighborhood "requires a redoubling of effort on all levels of government."

LaFalce is requesting federal reimbursement for the newly announced relocations; reconsideration of the federal decision, being appealed by the state, not to assist in the construction of remedial measures in the upper two-thirds of the canal and assistance for construction activities that might be needed in the "wet areas." In view of indications that relocation is going to be a much more expensive undertaking than at first expected, and in view of President Carter's declaring the canal neighborhood a disaster area last August, LaFalce's move for more help seems justified.

Federal Environmental Protection Agency rules to implement the National Conservation and Recovery Act are being debated. While it is said that the law deals with future situations and does not cover conditions such as the Love Canal, there should be a sense of some good-faith effort. If, however, there is any question about some federal role in the toxic-waste cleanup, the Western New York congressional delegation ought to take steps to get it cleared up.

Check Insurance Pact Carefully

The Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority is reported as likely to award, on Monday, an insurance contract for bidding on and administering the agency's insurance on the new $440-million

International
New York City

EVENING SUN
BALTIMORE, MD.
D-200,000

ASUU

FEB-9-79

# Change policy in Persian Gulf, Kissinger urging administration

LONDON (AP)—Former Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger says the United States should learn the lesson of Iran and change its policies toward Sau-di Arabia and other Persian Gulf states to account for political and social changes there.

"All of us paid insufficient attention in Iran to the proposition that political construction should go side-by-side with economic construction," Kissinger told

The Economist, a leading British week-ly.

"We must be careful not to use lack of success in one area as an alibi for failure to perform in others."

Kissinger, renewing criticisms of the Carter administration he made in a political speech last month in Port Chester, N.Y., said Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi's downfall was partially due to his doubts about Washington's

willingness to support him. He said America's ambivalent response to the shah's problems may imperil U.S. relations with the other Persian Gulf states.

"If they should conclude that at critical moments we will deal similarly with them, they will seek reassurance in Moscow or Baghdad now," said Kissinger.

He said President Carter's human rights policy contributed to the instability in Iran by pressuring the shah to make concessions at the wrong time. He did not elaborate.

The Nixon-Ford secretary of state also criticized Carter for failing to conclude an Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty after the Camp David summit last fall. The summit process should have been "carried to a conclusion rapidly and in a dominant fashion," he said. Now, however, the United States is considered "incapable of shaping events."

The interview was the second of two in *The Economist*. In the first one, he reiterated his position on the U.S.-Soviet strategic arms talks, saying the administration must tell the Soviets the talks "cannot survive" if the Kremlin continues waging proxy wars around the world.

He did not say he would not support a new strategic arms limitation agreement, but he focused on Soviet behavior in the years after the first arms agreement, which he negotiated, was completed in 1972.

Kissinger said American negotiators must recognize the growth of Soviet military strength and Russia's recent record of aggressiveness.

"The administration must make it clear that the SALT process cannot survive, and that it will not let it survive, if these challenges continue," he said.

Lighter
Side

Okla. State now
a real 'Disco Tech'

STILLWATER, Okla. (AP)—Oklahoma State University may have to change its name to “Disco Tech.”

The school is offering hotel and restaurant management students a one-week disco course featuring field trips to more than 40 establishments. About 35 students have signed up. The course is now one week only, but Oklahoma State says it may be expanded to a semester next fall.

bluntly. He said President Carter and his aides want Woodcock confirmed. "That's what they want," he said. "We are considering legislation on Taiwan's security. That's what we want."

Mr. Carter has said he will not accept a congressional statement about Taiwan's security if it interferes with the new relationship with Peking.

One result of the controversy is an almost certain delay on Woodcock's confirmation until shortly before he is to be installed as ambassador March 1.

Sen. Jesse Helms, R-N.C., who cast the lone committee vote against recommending the confirmation, said he would block floor action on the nomination until the Taiwanese security matter has been settled.

Senate tradition provides that one

the derision

supporters of the government.

"Bazargan, Bazargan, you are our prime minister," and "Bakhtiar, Bakh-

Law guardi
in trials is so

WASHINGTON (AP)—The Justice Department says it plans to push harder for a new law to allow prosecutors to keep sensitive government information secret during trials.

Weather Log

Today A Year Ago

sunny...................................................high 36, low 14.

Today's records

Highest of record..................68 in 1949.

Lowest of record..................78 in 1934.

Yesterday's Temperatures

High/low (BWI Airport)..................32/14.

Precipitation (BWI All-USA):

since dec

NEW YORK (AP)—Americans think less of Jimmy Carter's work than at any time since before the Camp David summit, an Associated Press-NBC News poll shows.

Concern over Iran and Mr. Carter's handling of the turmoil there were large factors in the decline, while the continued failure to achieve a peace agreement in the Middle East was also a factor.

In December. 36 percent of the pub
lic gave Mr. Carter good or excellent
marks. Interviews with 1,600 adults
Monday and Tuesday found only 28 per-
cent gave Carter such favorable marks

International
New York City

EVENING JOURNAL
WILMINGTON, DEL.
D-95,000

ASny

FEB-5-79

# Henry Kissinger's Revenge

By JAMES RESTON

WASHINGTON — The Economist of London, which is not a privileged publication, is now printing Henry Kissinger's extensive and mystifying views on the wisdom or otherwise of signing and ratifying a second strategic arms agreement with the Soviet Union.

No secretary of state and certainly no former secretary of state or United States senator in memory, past or present, has ever had such influence. One wonders why he would want to run for the senate in New York, when he can make so much more money and have so much more freedom and power by just appearing occasionally on NBC (on a million-dollar contract), making lectures at $10,000 a performance, writing books at God knows how much, and raising money for the Republican Party as the most popular speaker on the political circuit.

This, in a way, is Kissinger's revenge. He was brought out of Harvard by Nelson Rockefeller, and put into office by Richard Nixon, and villified in the presidential election campaign by Jimmy Carter, who is now appealing, almost pleading, for the Republicans to support his SALT II treaty, and needs Kissinger's help.

It's really not fair to talk about "Kissinger's revenge" because he is really not in a revengeful mood and has no reason to be so. He is one of the most important figures in the SALT debate, not because he seeks revenge against Carter, but because he has established himself in his own right as the most thoughtful public figure on foreign policy of our time, and now commands the respect of the foreign policy advisers in both parties.

But knowing this, Kissinger is being very careful to avoid taking a position on the SALT II treaty for or against the president, or the divided members of the Republican Party.

"This SALT agreement," he told The Economist, "at best slightly limits existing weapons programs, and it contains within it many dangers... It can perhaps be defended on the ground that it does not inhibit us from rectifying the imbalance which in the 1980's will face all the countries with the gravest dangers."

"I think," he added, "that at a minimum the ratification process should be used to put the Soviets on notice that the Congress of the United States cannot accept the constant challenges to the international order. How that might be achieved," he said, "I want to reserve for the ratification debate."

Kissinger told The Economist that he was concerned about the balance of power in the 1980's, and wanted to be sure that the Carter administration understood the dangers.

"The administration," he added, "has an obligation not to sell SALT with the argument that by itself it will usher in an era of peace. If my analysis of the 1980's is even approximately correct," he concluded, "we will enter an era of grave danger."

But there is no dispute about any of this. The administration agrees with this analysis. It also agrees with Kissinger that the proposed SALT agreement "at best slightly limits existing weapons." There is really no difference between them on this and most of Kissinger's other points.

The only difference is that Kissinger, the private citizen, is defining the issue on the television, in interviews, and in influential publications of the world, like The Economist, and the Carter administration is not.

What Henry doesn't analyze in this or any other interview he has given, is what the consequences would be if the Senate, after six years of negotiation including his own, rejected Carter's SALT II treaty. He has been very careful to define the questions without giving his own answers, and this is probably prudent on his part.

For the SALT II agreement has not yet been completed, let alone signed, and Kissinger is waiting for the critical last minute amendments before saying what in the end he would do.

The bet here is that he would approve the treaty with doubts and vague reservations at the end, but that he will go along and take a decisive margin of the doubting Republicans and Democrats with him.

Meanwhile, his views will be sought here and abroad, in the press, by leaders of the Executive and the Congress, by foreign ambassadors, and candidates for the Republican nomination for the Presidency, on the Today Show and on the Tonight Show and even by Jimmy Carter.

All the people who were for Kissinger in the past, and even those who were against him and still are — quite a few — still concede the point. Henry is still in the cat-bird seat, the most influential outsider-insider of our time.

Q. Was Roger Staubach a Rhodes scholar? I know he won the Heisman Trophy in 1963. — Robert King, Little Valley, N.Y.

Staubach, although a good student, was not a Rhodes scholar after attending the U.S. Naval Academy. The Dallas Cowboys, who knew he had a service commitment for four years, nevertheless drafted him on the 10th round in 1964, and he reported to them for the 1969 season — an old but well-preserved rookie of 27. He is a still well-preserved 37-year-old quarterback. A famous service academy football player who won the Heisman and studied on a Rhodes scholarship is Army's Pete Dawkins, now a high-ranking officer at Fort Ord, Calif.

Q. The statistics show that Rickey Young of the Minnesota Vikings was the leading receiver in pro football. I think there's something eminently unfair about a running back, who catches the ball most of the time behind the line of scrimmage, being the leader in such a vital statistic. What do you think? — G.P., Cincinnati, O.

You're touching one of my sensitive spots. I believe a forward pass should only be one that's caught beyond the line of scrimmage. As far as I'm concerned all the others should be labeled running plays, with the yardage going to the back. In fact, I'd make a radical rule change and call any ball thrown behind the line of scrimmage "live" — whether it's completed or not. Too many quarterbacks, going back to Milt Plum, have built their averages on quick flips to running backs, who then race 75 yards.

Newspaper Enterprise Association

Stanley Rio Wins Again at Dover Downs

DOVER — Stanley Rio, the former New Zealand Horse of the Year, continued his successful stint in the United States, scoring his second consecutive win at Dover Downs yesterday.

Leased by John Stalelman (Smyrna, Stanley Rio went up against a tough field of winners over $8,000 in yesterday's ninth race, but had no trouble in the contest and won handily in 2:02 1/2 with Stalelman at the reins.

In other action yesterday, Eddie Davis scored yet another driving triple winning with Adieu Guy in the second race, Quaker Bill in the fifth race, and with Avon Ogarita in the seventh. Davis now leads all drivers at Dover Downs with 28 victories on the season.

DOVER DOWNS

RESULTS

<table><tbody><tr><td>1st—Pace, $800, 2:10 1/5</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Kayson N. (Richards)</td><td>9.40</td><td>2.80</td><td>3.00</td></tr><tr><td>Cee Tee Gee (Morrill)</td><td></td><td>2.40</td><td>3.00</td></tr><tr><td>Whitney (Kingsley)</td><td></td><td></td><td>4.20</td></tr><tr><td>2nd—Pace, $800, 2:09 4/5</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Adeieu Gy (Davis)</td><td>3.20</td><td>3.00</td><td>2.80</td></tr><tr><td>Kelly G (Teague)</td><td></td><td>8.20</td><td>4.40</td></tr><tr><td>Raider City (Fitzgerald, Jr.)</td><td></td><td></td><td>4.20</td></tr></tbody></table>

DAILY DOUBLE (9-6) PAID $15.80
EXACTA (6-1) PAID $24.00

<table><tbody><tr><td>3rd—Pace, $900, 2:04 3/5</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Frisky Eddie (Stadeleman)</td><td>66.20</td><td>21.00</td><td>6.80</td></tr><tr><td>Slic Tar Port (Childress)</td><td></td><td>5.80</td><td>3.40</td></tr><tr><td>Chippy Chip (Suffel)</td><td></td><td></td><td>3.60</td></tr></tbody></table>

EXACTA (7-8) PAID $249.60

<table><tbody><tr><td>4th—Pace, 1900, 2:06 1/5</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Lookout Dapper Dan (Buckson)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Snow Socks (Lineweaver)</td><td>6.00</td><td>3.60</td><td>3.20</td></tr><tr><td>Beatie Bernie (Givens)</td><td></td><td>11.00</td><td>7.60</td></tr><tr><td>Exacta (7-6) PAID $70.40</td><td></td><td></td><td>3.20</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><tbody><tr><td>5th—Pace, $2,400, 2:04 1/5</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Quaker Bill (Davis)</td><td>10.20</td><td>4.80</td><td>3.60</td></tr><tr><td>No No Dares (Callahan)</td><td></td><td>4.80</td><td>3.60</td></tr><tr><td>Wiff Dick (Moore, Jr.)</td><td></td><td></td><td>4.80</td></tr></tbody></table>

EXACTA (8-1) PAID $80.60

<table><tbody><tr><td>Merrys Ayres (Hayler)</td><td>8.60</td><td>3.40</td><td>2.40</td></tr><tr><td>Ann Rockett (Myer)</td><td></td><td>3.20</td><td>2.40</td></tr><tr><td>Wizard (Pusey)</td><td></td><td></td><td>3.20</td></tr></tbody></table>

EXACTA (3-2) PAID $23.00

<table><tbody><tr><td>7th—Pace, $1,200, 2:06 1/5</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Avon Ogarita (Davis)</td><td>4.20</td><td>2.40</td><td>2.40</td></tr><tr><td>Crystal David (Pelura)</td><td></td><td>3.20</td><td>2.40</td></tr><tr><td>Away to Win (Jester)</td><td></td><td></td><td>4.80</td></tr></tbody></table>

EXACTA: (4 & 1) $12.40

8th—Pace, $2,000, 2:04 4/5

ET ICoreador (Schlotzhauer)

Save 40%
on everything

CLOSING
Sale

Our Closing
Saves You
Money on...

* PAINT (interior-exterior)

* PAINTING TOOLS

* LADDERS

* BRUSHES

* ROLLERS

* DROP CLOTHS

International
New York City

KNICKERBOCKER NEWS
ALBANY, N. Y.
E-65,000

ASUy

FEB-9-79

# Kissinger cites the 'lesson of Iran'

LONDON (AP) — Former Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger says the United States should learn the lesson of Iran and change its policies toward Saudi Arabia and other Persian Gulf states to account for political and social changes there.

"All of us paid insufficient attention in Iran to the proposition that political construction should go side-by-side with economic construction," Kissinger said in an interview in *The Economist*, a leading British weekly.

Kissinger, renewing criticisms of the Carter Administration he made in a political speech last month in Port Chester, N.Y., said Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi's downfall was partially due to his doubts about Washington's willingness to support him. He said America's ambivalent response to the shah's problems may imperil U.S. relations with the other gulf states.

Henry Kissinger

The interview was the second of two in *The Economist*. In the first one he reiterated his position on the U.S.-Soviet strategic arms talks, saying the administration must tell the Soviets the talks "cannot survive" if the Kremlin continues waging proxy wars around the globe.

A conference of Republican congressmen and governors in Easton, Md. last week echoed Kissinger's belief that any new SALT pact should be tied to Russian actions throughout the world. The Soviet news agency Tass reacted today by saying the Kremlin "never yielded to pressure, not to say black-mail."

"Look at what happened since 1975," Issinger said in The Economist. "... We have had Cuban troops in Angola ... in Ethiopia, two invasions of Zaire, a communist coup in Afghanistan ... in South Yemen and the occupation of Cambodia by Vietnam, all achieved by Soviet arms with Soviet encouragement and in several cases protected by the Soviet veto in the United Nations."

Marleaux
ked at his
I'll always

power.”

Tito divorce,
remarriage denied

A rare government statement on Yugooslavian President Josip Broz Tito's private life has blasted as "absurd" reports the 86-year-old leader has divorced his wife and married a 35-year-old opera singer.

Foreign ministry spokesman Mirko Kalezic said in a statement Thursday that reports that Tito had divorced Jovanka, his wife of more than 25

Scramb-L-Gram

Maria Isiaci of Albany is the winner of Scamb-L-Gram puzzle No. 33. Her successful entry wins her $50 in cash. Play Scamb-L-Gram today and get in on the fun.

accounting”
's accoun-

rvin's for-
love affair
its showed
he won the

s money in
bing center

oroved a
n southern
ection that
its current
the couple
was worth
5 for about

75

save
up to

on famous
& holid

it's a
'gigantic'

LINCOLN'S BIRTHDAY

CIEARAWAY

DAY SIZZLER!

DAY SPECIAL!

Save $61!

International
New York City

STAR
WASHINGTON, D. C.
E-405,000 S-355,000

FEB-8 -79

# The SALT preliminaries

You may well have wondered, lately, whether the debate over SALT-II will be over before the treaty is signed. There is a lively traffic in SALT-II futures; and the question must be asked: Is there anything useful to argue over *before* the finished treaty arrives?

There is. A diligent reader of the relevant literature will find, in fact, that while some details remain to be negotiated, and others to be disclosed, the basic provisions of the treaty are known. So is the political ambience in which they must be considered. We know, for instance, the total numbers of strategic "launch vehicles" (that is, land- or sea-based missiles, or bombers) permitted to both sides, as well as how many may be equipped with multiple warheads. (Two thousand two-hundred-fifty and 1,320, respectively).

But in many ways the numbers are the least important considerations. The tough questions are threefold, and may be summarized under the headings: Parity, stability, and linkage.

Parity must come first; for while it remains U.S. doctrine to accept "rough equivalence," that alleged equivalence needs examination. A dangerous asymmetry — to use the least pejorative term — has arisen in the pattern of U.S. and Soviet strategic arsenals. We chose to emphasize missile accuracy, they to emphasize missile power or "throw-weight." We stuck to the doctrine of deterrence; the Soviets are suspected of pursuing a doctrine of "counterforce" — i.e., the ability to target U.S. land-based missiles for pre-emptive destruction, while holding an impressive "second-strike" force in reserve. If so, the notion of equivalence, based on numbers alone, could be deceptive.

It is reckoned now that even if the strategic arms race were "frozen" by SALT-II at the present stage of comparative strength, we will be entering a period when the Soviet capacity to fight an imaginably "winnable" nuclear war will be growing even so — "seven singularly dangerous years," London's *Economist* calls it. The Soviet buildup in counterforce capacity is not, we must assume, aimed at actually fighting a nuclear Armageddon but at facilitating a policy of political adventure, backed by nuclear black-mail, in vital areas of the world.

This danger, which we take to be real enough, leads directly to the issue of *stability*. As it considers the SALT-II treaty, the Senate must ask which is less dangerous — a perceived imbalance of strategic power partly regulated by

treaty, or one left open to further negotiation. Stability — assured knowledge of what each power could or would do to the other in a nuclear confrontation — is, after all, the paramount purpose of arms control agreements. A treaty that "freezes" an implicit instability would be self-defeating. Stability, as we see it, involves no less than the search for predictability, the avoidance of miscalculation.

And the growing chance of miscalculation leads, in turn, to the third of the three great questions about SALT-II — the issue sometimes called "linkage." There are simple-minded notions of linkage in plenty. But basically, it is the issue of whether a SALT-II treaty can or should be isolated from secondary "theater" issues that create tension and uncertainty — issues such as the Soviet-backed adventures of 40,000 Cuban troops in Africa; such as the future of the Persian Gulf area after the Iranian debacle; such as the recent upgrading of Russian MIGs supplied to Cuba.

The Russians steadfastly insist that there be no "linkage," at least on our side, although Mr. Brezhnev's recent comments on the new American relationship with mainland China suggest that, from the Russian perspective, linkage is not ruled out.

If it be supposed, as many — including former Secretary of State Kissinger in a recent *Economist* interview — do suppose, that we are moving into a perilous time of imbalance (or asymmetry) in strategic capacities and purposes, then any arms-control treaty must be accompanied by firm understanding of how it fits into a constellation of geographical and political issues around the world. It's not that SALT must necessarily be held hostage to the number of Cubans in Africa. But if, as many think, the Russian "counterforce" capacity will soon offer them opportunities and temptations for nuclear black-mail, it is important to know whether the Russians propose a policy of restraint or one of blandishment and adventure, and how we are to distinguish between the two.

The Senate cannot answer that question unless it closely examines what the Russians are doing in various pressure points around the world. If this constitutes "linkage," the Soviets must make the best of it; for it would be irresponsible to ratify any treaty restraining U.S. nuclear armaments in the shadow of a potentially confrontational Soviet policy.

—Washington Star Photographer Willard Volz

House trailer on the mall.

gulation and restriction they hate

trained all our lives to think on our
independent decisions," said Nate
watha, Kan.

Agriculture Department is telling us
ray we can use and how many acres

year-old sister, Mattie Mez, said she
to Washington as an act of patrio-
bing a link with 11 generations of
ebears.

t to the Library of Congress and
re it showed one of my ancestors
the Speedwell, that was the second
Mez said. "And I had a grandfather
the Civil War, to keep this country

t myself and said, 'Mattie Mez, what
' Well, you see — I've come here

some disappointment at the outcome
of the Berrellez matter, saying "no-
body likes to see a case resolved
where there is not a test of guilt or
innocence."

The Berrellez case raised problems
that have appeared with increasing
frequency in so-called "graymail
cases." The term, derived from "black-
mail," refers to cases in which a de-
fendant, by contending that classified
information is essential to his de-
fense, tries to force the government to
drop its charges.

In 1977 the Justice Department al-
lowed former CIA Director Richard
Helms to plead "no contest" to a
misdemeanor charge of failing to
testify fully about the agency's covert
operations in Chile.

SEVERAL CONGRESSIONAL com-
mittees are studying the possibility of
legislation to establish court proce-
dures for the use of national security
information in court. But the issue is
so complicated that there has been no
agreement on any proposal to date.

The Berrellez case was the result of
a long, arduous investigation by
several Justice Department lawyers,
including G. Allen Carver and Robert
C. Andary.

The government's action today was
not a complete surprise. In asking the
Court of Appeals for a special order,
the Justice Department had warned
that Robinson's decision, if not over-
turned, "will in all likelihood prompt
the government to dismiss the
charges and terminate the prosecu-
tion rather than risk the compromise

wil-
tion
cor-
bec

Levinson said the Berrellez case
was "tremendously significant" as a
test of the integrity of the oath given
by witnesses during a congressional
investigation in the foreign relations
field.

Unless such oaths are enforced, he
said, Congress cannot be sure of ob-
taining the truth.

Board Debates Future
Of Teacher-Hypnotist

BRADENTON, Fla. (UPI) — The Board of Trustees of Manatee Junior College debated the fate yesterday of Professor Arlie Lincks, suspended in December for practicing hypnotism on his students.

The board had been scheduled to
decide whether Lincks should be
fired for insubordination, but it de-
layed a decision.

At issue was whether Lincks will-
fully ignored a prohibition on demon-
strating hypnosis during during two
classes he taught last fall.

MJC President Wilson Wetzler said
after trying unsuccessfully last
December to have Lincks' fired he
specifically included in Lincks' teach-
ing contract language making it clear
the two classes be only on the theory
of hypnosis, with no demonstrations
permitted.

et UP TO $35 cash back
Minolta's best-selling
automatic

International
New York City

UNION
SPRINGFIELD, MASS.
M-85,000

Asny

FEB-5-79

RESTON

Kissinger: outsider-insider

By JAMES RESTON

WASHINGTON — The Economist of London, which is not a frivolous publication, is now printing Henry Kissinger's extensive and mystifying views on the wisdom or otherwise of signing and ratifying a second strategic arms agreement with the Soviet Union.

No secretary of state and certainly no FORMER secretary of state or United States senator in memory, past or present, has ever had such influence. One wonders why he would want to run for the senate in New York, when he can make so much more money and have so much more freedom and power by just appearing occasionally on NBC (on a million-dollar contract), making lectures at $10,000 a performance, writing books at God knows how much, and raising money for the Republican party as the most popular speaker on the political circuit.

This, in a way, is Kissinger's revenge. He was brought out of Harvard by Nelson Rockefeller, and put into office by Richard Nixon, and vilified in the presidential election campaign by Jimmy Carter, who is now appealing, almost pleading, for the Republicans to support his SALT II treaty, and needs Kissinger's help.

It's really not fair to talk about "Kissinger's revenge" because he is really not in a revengeful mood and has no reason to be so. He is one of the most important figures in the SALT debate, not because he seeks revenge against Carter, but because he was established himself in his own right as the most thoughtful public figure on foreign policy of our time, and now commands the re-

* * *

But knowing this, Kissinger is being very careful to avoid taking a position on the SALT II treaty for or against the president, or the divided members of the Republican party.

* * *

Kissinger told The Economist that he was concerned about the balance of power in the 1980's, and wanted to be sure that the

Meanwhile, his views will be sought here and abroad, in the press, by leaders of the Executive and the Congress, by foreign ambassadors, and candidates for the Republican nomination for the presidency, on the Today Show and on the Tonight Show and even by Jimmy Carter.

Ben Wicks

The KGB has found a new victim. Prepare another hemorrhoid dart!"

By JO-ANN MORIARTY
Union Staff

EAST LONGMEADOW — Rod and Lynne Clark, parents of two little girls, may be a bit old to be playing with doll houses. But the one they built serves a twofold purpose.

The nine-room house model, measuring four by eight feet, is a replica of a house the Clarks hope eventually to build.

Underground.

That's right, underground.

According to Clark, who is a business analyst, he became interested in underground houses because of the escalating cost of home heating fuel.

Although they have modernized their 31 Redin Drive home, the Clarks still wanted a house that was ecologically and economically advantageous.

In its actual size, the house would be 2,200 square feet with a shop area and double garage.

"The house's materials would be steel and concrete. The roof would be made of steel beams and concrete planks, then covered by earth. The entire house would be embedded in a mountain side," he said.

Because of its materials, Clark said, the house is fireproof, thus reducing insurance costs. It would also be soundproof and require minimal maintenance.

In addition, he said, the entire front of the house would be lined with sliding glass doors with solar heating panels installed above them.

Although there would be no other windows in the rest of the house, Clark said, the rooms will be well light because of the frontal glass doors and also because the house has few walls and the rooms are sectioned off with decorative panels.

For example, the model shows that the dining room is divided from the living room by a central fireplace and the living room is separated from the study by a hanging panel.

Clark said the universal fuel costs by 75 percent, heated by solar energy. The earth's natural insulation would also help.

"Ten feet below the ground surface, the earth maintains a 55-degree temperature. Because the house will be built into the earth and have an earthen roof, the earth will help heat the house during the winter and cool it during the summer," Clark explained.

Also, he said, the sun is at a higher angle during the summer, consequently, direct sunlight will not pour into the house, which will help keep it cool.

Union Photos by Don Fontaine

To inspect their model house. In photo at right is glass doors that form

## Harnessing the sun to heat homes

of CET.

A grant will fund the hiring and training technicians and two crew chiefs through comprehensive Employment and Training (CET), finance design studies and cover administrative expenses. CET will use shop facilities at Berkshire Community College to install the installations as an "energy shop" for

about 20 calls had been received already indicating interest by tenants or home owners.

To be eligible a family or individual must meet federal low income guidelines: a couple must earn no more than $5,200 a year; a family of four cannot earn more than $7,900. Although the homeowner pays no money for the solar installation, he or she must attend two or three educational meetings, keep accurate fuel

houses and save money on fuel bills, an estimated 10 to 25 percent per year.

Interest in the Berkshire project, Nisson says, is especially high. CET is one of two non-profit organizations nationwide that plan to install the "passive" solar equipment, which collects and conserves without moving parts or machinery.

International
New York City

TEMES-INTON
ALBANY, N. Y.
M-80,000 S-135,000

ASU

FEB-2-79

By James Reston:

# Kissinger still carries clout

WASHINGTON — The *Economist* of London, which is not a frivolous publication, is now printing Henry Kissinger's extensive and mystifying views on the wisdom or otherwise of signing and ratifying a second strategic arms agreement with the Soviet Union.

No secretary of state and certainly no FORMER secretary of state or United States senator in memory, past or present, has ever had such influence. One wonders why he would want to run for the senate in New York, when he can make so much more money and have so much more freedom and power by just appearing occasionally on NBC (on a million-dollar contract), making lectures at $10,000 a performance, writing books at God knows how much, and raising money for the Republican Party as the most popular speaker on the political circuit.

But knowing this, Kissinger is being very careful to avoid taking a position on the SALT II treaty for or against the President, or the divided members of the Republican Party.

"This SALT agreement," he told the *Economist*, "at best slightly limits existing weapons programs, and it contains within it many dangers... It can perhaps be defended on the ground that it does not inhibit us from rectifying the imbalance which in the 1980s will face all the countries with the gravest dangers."

"I think," he added, "that at a minimum the ratification process should be used to put the Soviets on notice that the Congress of the United States cannot accept the constant challenges to the international order. How that might be achieved," he said, "I want to reserve for the ratification debate"

Kissinger told the *Economist* that he was concerned about the balance of power in the 1980s, and wanted to be sure that the Carter administration understood the dangers.

The only difference is that Kissinger, the private citizen, is defining the issue on television, in interviews, and in influential publications of the world, like the *Economist*, and the Carter administration is not.

For the SALT II agreement has not yet been completed, let alone signed, and Kissinger is waiting for the critical last minute ammendments before saying what in the end he would do.

Meanwhile, his views will be sought here and abroad, in the press, by leaders of the Executive and the Congress, by foreign ambassadors, and candidates for the Republican nomination for the presidency, on the *Today Show* and on the *Tonight Show* and even by Jimmy Carter.

ARGUS

DOKUMENTATIONS-SERVICE PRESSE, RADIO, TV
INTERNATIONALER ARGUS DER PRESSE AG
CH-8030 Zürich
Telefon 01 34 49 37

Tages-Anzeiger
Zürich (CH)
Aufl. t. 257 599

23. Febr. 1979

Vorträge des Starjournalisten und «Geopolitikers» de Borchgrave

Untergangsvisionen eines Kissinger-Intimus

De Borchgrave, Arnaud, Senior Editor bei der amerikanischen Wochenzeitschrift «Newsweek», Starinterviewer von herrschenden und gefallenen Königen, Staatspräsidenten, Ministern, Intimus von Bürger Resa Pahlewi und Professor Henry Kissinger: Dieser meistzitierte Journalist am «meistzitierten Nachrichtenmagazin» (so «Newsweeks» Werbespruch) hielt am Dienstag und Donnerstag Vorträge in Zürich zur internationalen Lage. Er sprach an besten Adressen, im Schweizerischen Institut für Auslandforschung und vor dem Harvard Club of Switzerland. Die Bankgesellschaft lud zu einem festlichen Nachtessen.

Was berichtete der «Newsweek»-Star aus adligem Hause seinem atemlos zuhörenden Elitepublikum und den Wirtschaftsführern, die (nicht alle zwar) gebannt an seinen Lippen hinogen? Er entwarf ein Untergangsszenario, das schwärzer nicht hätte sein können.

Die Flammen der Iranischen Revolu-
tion – so hub de Borchgrave an – ha-
ben ein «geopolitisches Vakuum» zu-
rückgelassen. Hinter dem Ayatollah
Khomeini, einem mittelalterlich-fanati-
schen Finsterling, haben sich angeblich
Linksradikale in islamisch-geistlicher
Tarnung eingenistet. Wie «Geheim-
dienstkreise» dem Amerikaner zu-
steckten, sickern massenhaft sowjet-
trainierte Agenten aus Afghanistan,
Palästina und Libyen in das «iranische
Vakuum».

Vor vier Jahren noch hätten Ameri-
kas Feinde in einem Land wie Iran
beim Sturm auf den alliierten Freund,
den Schah, eine Intervention der Mari-
nes befürchtet, zitierte der Redner
seinen Mentor Kissinger. «Doch jetzt
hat Carters Washington einfach bewie-
sen, dass es jede geopolitische Ver-
schlechterung hinnimmt. Wir lassen
Moskau demonstrieren, dass die So-
wjets in Kambodscha und Iran gleich-
zeitig zustossen dürfen. In Iran hat

Amerika die demütigendste Niederlage
seit Vietnam erlitten...»

Einen einzigen schwachen Hoff-
nungsschimmer nimmt de Borchgrave
wahr. «In Amerika regen sich wieder
die Neokonservativen, um der Geopoli-
tik ihren wahren Platz zuzuweisen.»

Es war fast unmöglich, von dieser
brisanten Stilsmischung aus John Foster
Dulles (US-Aussenminister der 50er
Jahre) und John Le Carré (Thriller-
schreiber unserer Tage) nicht gefesselt
zu sein. Apropos: Was heisst eigentlich
«Geopolitik» – ein Wort, das sich leit-
motivisch durch den Vortrag zog?
Brockhaus definiert sie als «Lebens-
raumtheorie» im Vorfeld des deutschen
Nationalsozialismus, als (veraltete)
Uebertragung biologischer Gesetzmäs-
sigkeiten auf politische Vorgänge. Kis-
singer hat ihr im Zusammenhang zwi-
schen Geographie und Machtentfaltung
einige Bedeutung zu unterlegen ver-
sucht. Verabsolutiert wie bei ihm und
vollends bei de Borchgrave, bedeutet
Geopolitik einen Rückfall in die Kabi-
nettschroniken und territorialen Auf-
rechnungen des letzten Jahrhunderts,
die man damals für Zeitanalysen hielt.

Was hätte der von de Borchgrave
und Kissinger tief verachtete Carter in
Iran denn tun sollen? Viel fiel auch de
Borchgrave nicht ein zu dieser Zuhö-
rerfrage. «Dem treuen Freund sagen,
dass wir ihn stützen; das hätte ihm
Kraft für den Widerstand und Zeit für
Reformen gegeben», meinte der
Redner.

Aus einem Leserbrief in der briti-
schen Zeitschrift «Economist», auf die
de Borchgrave immer wieder hinwies:
«Bei Kissingers Iran-Kommentaren
wimmelt es von Fehlern. Bis fast zum
Ende unterstützte Carter den Schah
vorbehaltlos. Kissinger selber ist nicht
unschuldig an zwei Umständen, die
den Fall des Schahs mit heraufbe-
schworen. Der eine: allumfassende
Korruption am kaiserlichen Hof, die
Pahlewis Feinde zusammenschweisste.
Der zweite: die von Nixon/Kissinger er-

mutigte gigantische Rüstungssucht des
Schahs, die nicht nur einen finanziel-
len Engpass und damit soziale Störun-
gen, sondern auch Pahlewis volksfer-
nen Grössenwahnsinn heraufbe-
schwor.» Der Brief ist unterzeichnet
von George Ball, Carters Berater in
einer späten Phase der amerikanischen
Iran-Politik. Eines Kurses, der – Gott
sei Dank – endlich aus dem Irrweg
verabsolutierter Geopolitik herausfand.

Wer die damit gewonnene neue Fle-
xibilität des Westens in Rechnung
stellt, wird auch keine Untergangssze-
narien umschreiben wollen.

Peter Studer

Wohnwand 221.514

277 cm lang. Fronten, Stollen, Zier-
griffe echt Eiche, übrige Teile
Eichendekor. Beleuchtete Hausbar.
Besteck-Schublade auf Führungs-
schienen. Mitte Vitrine.

● MP-Alleinverkauf. 990.-/890.-

Wohnwand 221.492

verschönern,

ch so tief sind:
ce hilft Ihnen!

ungsservice:

ahl an Teppichen,
n usw., in vielen
mten Farben kom-
sie!

Weitere Leistungen und Vorteile!

Barzahlung: Anzahlung nach Vereinbarung, Rest bis 90 Tage nach Lieferung. Moderne Finanzierungsmöglichkeiten. Gratisbenzin, Bahn-/Postautovergütung ab Fr. 500.-.

Selber abholen - Geld sparen!

Mitnahme-Artikel können Sie mit Ihrem Auto oder mit einem gemieteten Kleintransporter abholen.

ZÜRICH

neplatz b. Hbf. Tel. 01/47 32 32

B. d. Sihlbrücke Tel. 01/242 36 50

Letzti

ARGUS

Telefon 01 34 49 37

Zuger Tagblatt
Zug (CH)
Aufl. t. 512a

10. Febr. 1979

Iran: Ein 6-Punkte-Programm der Gegenregierung soll Lage stabilisieren

# Bazargan fordert Rücktritt Bakhtiar s

Der Chef der von Schiitenführer Ayatollah Khomeyni ernannte «Gegenregierung», Bazargan, hat an einer Pressekonferenz in Teheran den amtierenden Ministerpräsidenten Bakhtiar zum Rücktritt aufgefordert. Die Armee forderte Bazargan auf, sich auf die Aufgabe der Verteidigung der Grenzen zu beschränken. Der Chef der «provisorischen Regierung» gab ausserdem ein «Sechs-Punkte-Regierungsprogramm» bekannt. Es umfasst: Uebergang der Regierungsgewalt von der gegenwärtigen zu seiner Regierung, Abhaltung eines Referendums über die künftige Regierungsform, Neuorganisation der Nation, Wahlen für eine Verfassunggebende Versammlung, Ausarbeitung einer neuen Verfassung, Abhaltung von Parlamentswahlen und Bildung einer islamischen Regierung. Etwa 5000 Iraner haben gestern in einem Sportstadion in Teheran eine Demonstration durchgeführt, um ihre Treue zum Schah auszudrücken. In Sprechchören forderten sie ausserdem die Unterstützung der Regierung Bakhtiar.

Bazargan rief ausserdem die streikenden Landsleute auf, für einen Tag die Arbeit wiederaufzunehmen, um damit ihre Unterstützung für seine Politik zu bekunden. Vor etwa 400 000 Menschen erklärte Bazargan vor dem Eingang der Universitätsmoschee in Teheran, die Streikkomitees der Arbeiter sollten das Datum dieses Aktionstages selbst bestimmen. Er nannte ein weiteres Mal Ministerpräsident Bakhtiar seinen persönlichen Freund, der viele Förderungen der von Ayatollah Khomeyni geführten Opposition erfüllt habe. Nun müsse Bakhtiar diese «Liste durch seinen Rücktritt» vervollständigen. Bazargan kündigte an, er werde in den kommenden Tagen die Namen der Minister seiner «provisorischen Regierung» bekanntgeben. Inoffiziell war bereits von einer Teheraner Zeitung eine Namensliste des «Schattenkabinenetts» veröffentlicht worden.

## Iranische Kommunisten hinter Khomeyni

Die in Iran verbotene Kommunistische Partei «Tudeh» hat in einem in Budapest veröffentlichten Interview ihre Unterstützung für die Bewegung des Schiitenführers Khomeyni bekundet. Die iranische Bevölkerung wurde aufgefordert, «sich für einen möglichen Bürgerkrieg» zu rüsten.

## Kritik und Warnungen

Der ehemalige amerikanische Aussenminister Kissinger hat die mangelnde Unter

stützung des Schahs durch Präsident Carter kritisiert. In einem am Freitag veröffentlichten Interview des britischen Wirtschaftsmagazins «The Economist» gab Kissinger der amerikanischen Regierung teilweise die Schuld am Zusammenbruch der Herrschaft des Schahs.

«Einer der Gründe für die zunehmende Demoralisierung des Schahs waren seine echten Zweifel, ob wir ihn tatsächlich unterstützen», erklärte Kissinger. Er verwies darauf, dass der Schah seit 37 Jahren einer der engsten Verbündeten der USA im Mittleren Osten gewesen ist. «Er verliess sein Amt unter dem sichtbaren Drängen der Vereinigten Staaten.»

Kissinger interpretierte die Vorgänge in Iran verbunden mit den Verzögerungen

eines Abschlusses des Abkommens von Camp David zwischen Israel und Aegypten als eine faktische Abdankung der USA in der Weltpolitik.

Der marokkanische König Hassan II. erklärte in einem Interview mit dem französischen Radiosender «France Inter», wenn Iran falle, werde sich der «Entstabilisierungsprozess in der ganzen Welt beschleunigen». Ein kommunistischer Iran würde eine Kettenreaktion auslösen, die sämtliche in den Ländern des Raumes des Persischen Golfes gelegenen heiligen Stätten des Islams ideologisch bedrohen. Als «Drama des Irans» bezeichnete es der Monarch, dass es in Persien keine politischen Parteien gegeben habe.

ARGUS

Telefon 01 34 49 37

Luzerner Tagblatt
Luzern (CH)
Aufl. t. 25 751

10. Febr. 1979

## Iran: Ein 6-Punkte-Programm der Gegenregierung soll Lage stabilisieren

Bazargan rief ausserdem die streikenden Landsleute auf, für einen Tag die Arbeit wiederaufzunehmen, um damit ihre Unterstützung für seine Politik zu bekunden. Vor etwa 400 000 Menschen erklärte Bazargan vor dem Eingang der Universitätsmoschee in Teheran, die Streikkomitees der Arbeiter sollten das Datum dieses Actionstages selbst bestimmen. Er nannte ein weiteres Mal Ministerpräsident Bakhtiar seinen persönlichen Freund, der viele Förderungen der von Ayatollah Khomeyni geführten Opposition erfüllt habe. Nun müsse Bakhtiar diese «Liste durch seinen Rücktritt» vervollständigen. Bazargan kündigte an, er werde in den kommenden Tagen die Namen der Minister seiner «provisorischen Regierung» bekanntgeben. Inoffiziell war bereits von einer Teheraner Zeitung eine Namensliste des «Schattenkabintets» veröffentlicht worden.

### Iranische Kommunisten hinter Khomeyni

### Kritik und Warnungen

stützung des Schahs durch Präsident Carter kritisiert. In einem am Freitag veröfentlichten Interview des britischen Wirtschaftsmagazins «The Economist» gab Kissinger der amerikanischen Regierung teilweise die Schuld am Zusammenbruch der Herrschaft des Schahs.

Der marokkanische König, Hassan II. erklärte in einem Interview mit dem französischen Radiosender «France Inter», wenn Iran falle, werde sich der «Entstabsili sierungsprozess in der ganzen Welt beschleunigen». Ein kommunistischer Iran würde eine Kettenreaktion auslösen, die sämtliche in den Ländern des Raumes des Persischen Golfes gelegenen heiligen Stätten des Islams ideologisch bedrohen. Als «Drama des Irans» bezeichnete es der Monarch, dass es in Persien keine politischen Parteien gegeben habe.

ARGUS

Walliser Bote
Brig (CH)
Aufl. t. 17 097

10.Febr.1979

Kissinger und Hassan kritisieren

969 10

# Die USA tragen Schuld

Washington. — Der ehemalige amerikanische Aussenminister Kissinger hat die mangelnde Unterstützung des Schahs durch Präsident Carter kritisiert. In einem am Freitag veröffentlichten Interview des britischen Wirtschaftsmagazins «The Economist» gab Kissinger der amerikanischen Regierung teilweise die Schuld am Zusammenbruch der Herrschaft des Schahs.

Kissinger interpretierte die Vorgänge in Iran verbunden mit den Verzögerungen eines Abschlusses des Abkommens von Camp David zwischen Israel und Aegypten als eine faktische Ab-

Der marokkanische König Hassan II. erklärte in einem Interview mit dem französischen Radiosender «France Inter», wenn Iran falle, werde sich der «Entstabilisierungsprozess in der ganzen Welt beschleunigen.» Ein kommunistischer Iran würde eine Ketenreaktion auslösen, die sämtliche in den Ländern des Raumes des Persischen Golfes gelegenen heiligen Stätten des Islams ideologisch bedrohe. Als «Drama des Irans» bezeichnete es der Monarch, dass es in Persien keine politischen Parteien gegeben habe.

nungen mit kleineren
christlichdemokratischen
der Führung seiner eigenen

In dieser ersten Runde
noch keine Aussicht auf eine Lösung
der Regierungskrise ab, die durch den
Entzug der kommunistischen Unter-
stützung für Andreotti in der vorigen
Woche ausgelöst wurde.

In der nächsten Woche will Andreotti mit den Vertretern der fünf Part-

ren christlichdemokratisches Kaubett
gestützt haben, also mit Christlich-
demokraten, Kommunisten, Soziali-\sten, Republikanern und Sozialdemo-
kraten. Erklärtes Ziel Andreottis ist
es, die bisherige Regierungsmehrheit
wieder herzustellen.

Kinshasa: Weisse leben gefährlich

## Erzbischof überfallen

Brüssel. — Der Erzbischof von Kinshasa, Kardinal Joseph Balula, ist nach einer Meldung der katholischen belgischen Nachrichtenagentur CIP-DIA am vergangenen Dienstag in seinem Haus von etwa 20 bewaffneten Männern überfallen und ausgeraubt worden.

Einige Täter seien mit Armeeunifor-
men bekleidet gewesen, meldete die
Agentur am Freitag in Brüssel. Die
Räuber, die in den Schlafraum des
Kardinals eingedrungen seien, hätten
Bargeld, Radio- und Fernsehgeräte
sowie den Privatwagen des Geistlichen
arbeutet

250 belgische Fallschirmjäger zu einer,
wie es offiziell in Brüssel hiess, be-
grenzten Ausbildungszeit nach Zaire
entsandt werden. Aus Kreisen des bel-
gischen Aussenministeriums verlautete
jedoch, die Regierung fühle sich für
die Sicherheit der in Zaire lebenden
Weissen verantwortlich wo schwierige

["KALLIE infotec", "C. Hambro & Sons\nJ. Hambro & Sons\nC. Hambro & Sons\nC. Hambro & Sons\nC. Hambro & Sons

Economist

R&C

ROMEIKE & CURTICE

THE PRESS CLIPPING BUREAU Tel: 01-882 0185

Spectator

Planner No. 73-330

Weekly - 12,181

17 FEB 1979

Spectator 17 February 1979

3

The limits of Realpolitik

Could the United States have helped the Shah? Would an American intervention, physical or merely propagandist, have stabilised the situation in Persia? These are among the questions discussed by Dr Henry Kissinger in the course of a two-part interview just published in the *Economist*. Dr Kissinger takes the view that President Carter did not do enough: 'One of the reasons for the Shah's progressive demoralisation was his very real doubt whether we were actually supporting him.' As far as this goes it is a factual statement. President Carter certainly shilly-shallied over the Persian crisis, blew hot and cold. Whether he could have saved the Shah, it might be argued, is one question: what he clearly did was to precipitate his departure.

Yet to criticise the present nerveless American administration is not necessarily to concede the points that Dr Kissinger is making. For what precisely were the options open to the United States? 'We surely should not exclude [willingness to use military force to uphold a particular regime] publicly,' says Dr Kissinger. But if ever there was a case where military force would have produced calamitous results it is Persia. The Americans were already deeply unpopular there. Any intervention would, whatever other effect it had, have united the Persian people in opposition to the United States and to anyone seen to be enjoying American support. Even to talk of outside military intervention is to ignore the reality of the situation, as described on another page by Mr Edward Mortimer. Almost all outside observers underestimated the internal stresses in Persia, quite failed to appreciate the level of popular feeling against the Shah and the potential for a movement of Islamic reaction. Dr Kissinger still, apparently, does not see this.

Unfortunately it is all too typical of him. For all his intricate mental processes and his verbose and barbarous jargon – he says that the new Sino-American rap-prochement ‘may well be perceived by Moscow as a potential for encirclement’ – he is a geopolitical Bourbon: in the last 15 years he has learnt nothing and forgotten

nothing. He still sees the world in terms of what is misleadingly called Realpolitik, he still thinks only of the balance of power, he still follows the example of his idol Metternich. He regrets the failure of the Americans to balance Soviet aggression, lamenting the 'emasculation' of the CIA, and he hopes for new bargains struck and agreements reached with the Russians. Again and again in his analyses he fails to take account of the special circumstances of one area or another, to see that popular movements and national sentiment may count for more than geopolitical considerations. The Western allies have, to be sure, problems on their hands at the moment with Russian expansionism in Africa and Asia, with the Soviet coups in Afghanistan and South Yemen. However, it is not complacency but true realism which should make us wary of Dr Kissinger's brand of global politics as an answer.

If the former Secretary of State had an impressive record of success behind him we might be more inclined to listen to his advice, ignoring the cynicism and calculation. But has he? In a fascinating interview in the *New York Review* another and greater statesman, Prince Norodom Sihanouk of Cambodia, gives a sombre and reasoned verdict on the outcome in South-East Asia. Though no one country is to blame for the fate of Cambodia, the chief blame lay with Mr Nixon and his Secretary of State: 'If the US had refused to help Lon Nol after the coup [which removed Sihanouk in March [1970] he would have collapsed. This did not happen because Nixon and Kissinger did not want Sihanouk back ... Kissinger hated me.' 'Lon Nol was nothing without them and the Khmer Rouge were nothing without Lon Nol. By expanding the war into Cambodia, Nixon and Kissinger killed a lot of Americans and many other people, they spent enormous sums of money – $4 billion – and the results were the opposite of what they wanted. They lost all of Indochina to the communists.' Such is the main achievement of Henry Kissinger; such the result of Realpolitik. Should we be surprised? After all, Metternich fled as the revolutions of 1848 broke, and died a failure.

Spectator 17 February 1979

Goodbye to the peasants

Ferdinand Mount

What we are now seeing and suffering has finally had a name stuck to it. This, observers agree, is the Peasants' Revolt. After years of wage control, the serfs and villeins have at last exploded into protest, disregarding the admirable provisions of the Statute of Labourers 'against the malice of servants, who were idle, and not willing to serve after the pestilence without excessive wages' and 'having no regard to the ordinance, but to their ease and singular covetousness, do withdraw themselves from serving great men and others, unless they have livery and wages double or treble of what they were wont to take.' The sovereign, a weak and vacillating character, rides out on a white horse, waving a concordat, but nevertheless appears to be on the skids. It all fits nicely. The only obvious difference between now and the fourteenth century is that these days the rats appear during and not before the industrial action.

This delightful parallel does, however, have one disadvantage: that it perpetuates, even if indirectly and lightheartedly, a picture of English history which may well be fatally distorted. For in the 1380s it seems that the Peasants' Revolt was never called the Peasants' Revolt; contemporary documents mildly labelled it 'the time of rumours'. And the rebels included yeomen and merchants as well as the low-paid. It seems too that the English never thought of themselves as peasants at all. Before 1500 they only used the word 'paisaunts' to describe foreigners, except in fransified

All this was destroyed by the cruel alienating force of capitalism which separated men from one another by introducing cash into their transactions; the peasantry were gradually winkled off the land and into the proletariat; the warm inclusive spirit of community gave way to the cold formality of civil association; the modern nuclear family - grasping, introverted, isolated from and suspicious of its neighbours - was born.

This picture of history is deeply imprinted not merely on Marxists but on a great many sociologists and anthropologists, and indeed on almost anyone who uses phrases like 'the late bourgeois world' or 'the nuclear family'. The belief that what we now think of as the normal family is a recent innovation licenses sociologists to study our ways of marrying and bringing up children as a kind of quaint historical accident. The nuclear family system, Sir Edmund Leach, the quondam Provost of King's, tells us, 'is a most unusual kind of organisation, and I would predict that it is only a transient phase in our society.'

The history of the family has a lot to answer for. And recently it has become less and less adept at coming up with the answers. For one thing, historians have had to push the Great Transformation further and further back from the sixteenth century to the fifteenth century and beyond. They are finding nuclear families all over the Middle Ages - in tenth-century Florence and in Burgundy at about the same time. And do not the families of the

proportion of the same surnames remain on the parish records from one generation to another; women could own and manage land; unlike Juliet and the Wife of Bath, most women married late; even at an early date, Englishmen had the freedom to leave their property to anyone they liked; far from helping their fathers, boys were boarded out as apprentices or hired farmhands at an age which shocked foreigners; married siblings were seldom if ever to be found living in the same household; and when and if adult children did house their aged parents, they often charged them rent, called them 'lodgers' and even drew up legal agreements to avoid misunderstandings.

In short, 'the majority of ordinary people in England from at least the thirteenth century were rampant individualists highly mobile both geographically and socially, economically "rational", market-orientated and acquisitive, ego-centred in kinship and social life.' And the scant evidence of even earlier times suggests that all this was nothing new. Far from representing a total revolution in English life, the imposition of feudalism begins to look rather more like a bureaucratic overlay - resembling less the Russian Revolution than the Heath-Walker reforms in local government.

Wideawake Marxists now have to grapple with a serious threat to their unilinear pattern of history. Perry Anderson, for example, takes care both in *Passages from Antiquity to Feudalism* and *Lineages of the Absolutist State* to pour scorn on the way the English cherish 'local legends of unbroken continuity.' Anderson combines a fine, ferocious energy with considerable tactical cunning; as a schoolboy fielding at point, he once managed to run out an incautious batsman at the bowler's end by calling for a short single in the other batsman's voice.

He deftly concedes that the feudal world was a patchwork of different social for-

RAC

ROMEIKE & CURTICE

THE PRESS CLIPPING BUREAU Tel: 01-862 0195

New Statesman

Planner No. 73-255

Weekly - 67,000

16 FEB 1979

New York Diary

☐ Sometimes I think there's a lot to be said for President Carter. His response to the foreign policy debacle in Iran has been to urge the citizenry to drive at 55 miles per hour, and thus offset the loss of Iranian oil. Since Nixon said the same thing in the wake of the oil embargo in 1973 we may assume this is now the authorised bipartisan reaction to reverses overseas.

Republicans are now announcing the end of 'bipartisan' foreign policy, so maybe one of their presidential candidates will recommend that Americans drive 10 mph faster to dramatise the gravity of the situation. Conservatives, of course, have always chafed at speed limits and devices to prevent them from being mangled in a crash - George Will, right-wing columnist, once argued that airplane seat belts place an intolerable restriction on human liberty. Politicians in Wyoming are now so keen on raising the speed limit to 65 mph that they are considering forfeiture of the Federal highway subsidy, one of the most cherished pieces of pork in the barrel. Death at any speed, but preferably as fast as possible.

☐ It seemed for a while that the Shah would commence his exile in the Palm Springs estate of former London ambassador Walter Annenberg, the conservative communications millionaire. Nixon stayed there in his dark hour, and so did Agnew. In fact Annenberg has such a liking for deposed princes, emperors, presidents and others of high estate that he could open up a theme park where foreign despots might be observed in a natural setting, sunning themselves, totting up their sequestered assets and rehearsing for the day of ultimate return. Pot Pol may be there already toiling away as a gardener.

But Annenberg's hospitality was apparently somewhat strained recently by a visit of the Shah's mother. She arrived with twenty-one dogs, a couple of vets and other flunkeys too numerous to mention. Mr and Mrs Annenberg cherish their lawns and suffered with abhorrence much canine rootling. Now Annenberg is said to be noting with satisfaction the Shah's present preference for Morocco.

☐ The circumstances in which Nelson Rockefeller died remain the main topic of conversation in New York. The original notion, propounded by Nelson's chief flack, was of course that he died in his office while toiling late on a book about art, and that his passing rivalled that of Socrates in its elevation and dignity. Then it transpired that he was in another house with a woman and there was an hour missing between time of heart attack and time of first emergency call.

What actually happened? Nelson was created at tremendous speed, which disposed of some of the evidence. Megan Marshack, the 25 year old assistant with him at time of expiry, is keeping her mouth shut. Her friend Poncita Pierce, summoned by Megan in the hour of crisis, made the emergency call, but will say nothing further. At least some of the Rockefeller clan are known to be indignant at the possibility that precious minutes slipped by while Marshack dithered. From them have come the leaks that she was paid

$60,000 a year, had riding lessons in Pocantico and ordered the servants around.

Rockefeller was renowned for his abrupt enthusiasms for women, though the newspapers remained discreet about the matter when he was alive. The *schadenfreude* with which they are covering his death is a way of making up for years of deference to the old beast. (Even his last business venture, manufacture of copies of his art treasures which he then flogged to the populace, was treated with respect.) Meanwhile, millions of husbands across the country will revile him for bringing the ancient and honoured practice of 'working late at the office' into disrepute.

☐ One of the less sad aspects of Rockefeller's death is that it may prevent Henry Kissinger from reaching the US Senate. He had been mooting a race in 1980, replacing Jacob Javits, who is 75 this year. Javits had seemed prepared to bow out gracefully but in the last few days has sprung into pre-electoral activity, accepting speaking engagements from Republican county chairmen and the like. The sagacious Javits has been heartened by the fact that Kissinger is now denied the services of his sponsor Nelson as fundraiser and arm-twister in chief. Kissinger's voice was certainly tremendous in the memorial service when he hailed the chief as the greatest American he had ever known. There is absolutely nothing that Kissinger will not do to ingratiate himself with the Republican establishment and thus keep his options open for a return to glory.

His reservations about SALT II, planted in the *Economist* and widely publicised here, have plainly affected the already slim chances of this meagre treaty getting through the Senate. Now he is proclaiming that Carter's wet passion for human rights and insufficient zest for intervention or a sponsored coup by the military 'lost' Iran. If anything 'lost' Iran it was manifestly Kissinger's preference for tyranny, the electrode and the thumbscrew as preferred methods of governance in the lands of America's allies. One of the more serious charges one can lay to the American people is that they continue to regard this butcher's apologist as a statesman.

☐ In contrast to British frenzies, the US media have been relatively restrained in coverage of strike chaos. Some of this restraint may stem from the fact that it is now a simple matter of doubling the numbers to get the dollar equivalent of sterling. Thus US reporters probing the island's discontents on a salary of $35,000 or so find that the strikers are after rather exigious amounts of change. Some of the plumier types of pundit have naturally been expounding on the constrictions of the British class system, contrasted as usual with the gilded stairway to riches available to all this side of the Atlantic.

A trot around Harlem is a quick corrective to this kind of talk. The median income in the United States is actually $17,000 and 87 per cent of the population will never squeeze past the bottleneck, which comes at $30,000. After this it is a chancy business getting on to the level of the thousand or so people who report annual income of over $1 million on their tax forms.

☐ New York continues to take up where Sodom and Gomorrah left off. Studio 54, Disco-snob capital of the Western World, is becoming a little jaded by time - and drug

indictments - but the traveller can find other places of diversion. G and G Barnum, for example, sits just off Times Square, on the site of the old Peppermint Lounge where the twist started. In it cavort, to disco-din, an assortment of straights and some of the most beautiful transvestites in the city.

Above them go-go dancers swing with inexpert energy from trapezes. In the era of the hormone shot it is useless to regard bosoms as a reliable sex indicator. Ankles and shoulders can be useful clues but experts swear that the male adam's apple is the true give-away.

More jaded libertines can press south to the industrial district and Château 19. On Tuesdays and Thursdays some 500 people gather here to enjoy New York's first public S and M club. No staged revue, but participatory democracy. The customers insult, shackle and whip each other according to taste. Admission price: $7.50 for men and $2.50 for women. The most interesting customers are the dozen or so dominatrixes (or dominatrixes, if you will). Queen of this set is a nineteen-year-old called Mistress Rose, marvellously adroit at trussing men up in cellophane. They stand like flies in amber, exulting as Rose wangs away with her pandy bat. She says she learned the tricks at the age of ten from her mother, who was professional in the business.

Alexander Cockburn

New Statesman 16 February 1979

Iran's Revolution Isn't Over Yet

George Ball Reports:

THE
NEW PERIL AT
THE OIL.
CROSSROADS

3/15

By George W. Ball

© 1979 The Washington Star

Particularly after 1972, when he began to acquire vast armaments, and 1974, when burgeoning oil prices encouraged his vaulting ambitions, the shah built up resentments in every part of Iranian society.

The desire to get rid of his regime was all-pervasive — shared not only by the mullahs and other religious leaders (who talked vaguely of an “Islamic republic”).

Also seeking it were middle-class professional men, many of whom had been secret members of the National Front (the party of Mohammed Mossadegh) and who primarily wanted a Western-style democracy; Marxists, some presumably allied with the Tudeh Party (the pro-Soviet Communist Party that had been

This is the second of a series by George W. Ball, undersecretary of state in the Kennedy and Johnson administrations, and former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. He most recently served as special adviser to President Carter on Iran.

underground since 1954) and others who were anti-Soviet but still committed to a Marxist state; unemployed workers; and embittered students, who, whether militantly leftist or militantly rightist, all hated the shah and his brutal rule.

But since different groups had different reasons for hating the shah, they had no central focus. That need was filled when, during 1978, the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini offered the convenient banner of Islamic fervor under which millions of people could unite for the single purpose of driving the shah from power.

Ironically, it was the shah himself — or at least his palace cronies — who supplied the impetus for Khomeini's emergence. In January 1978 a leading Tehran newspaper published an anonymous letter that was widely attributed to the palace — and even to the shah himself.

**THAT LETTER** viciously attacked Khomeini, who was then in exile in Iraq, and heaped scurrilous results on members of his family. Some of the ayatollah's supporters demonstrated their displeasure and when police tried to break them up, six were killed.

Under Moslem practice, 40 days after the occurrence of a death, there is a day of mourning. That day of mourning was marked by another demonstration that resulted in 12 more deaths. Again 40 days later, on the day of mourning for that incident, another demonstration and more shootings occurred.

Demonstrations spread from one city to another until, in May, 34 cities were involved, including Tehran. By June thousands of people were engaging in protests.

See IRAN, A-8

TRICIA NIXON COX

port that like all babies this is a very fine looking baby. He
is a handsome young lad and I am particularly pleased that
Tricia is doing very well."

Heinasirkka, Heinasirkka!

St. Urho's Day, the Finn's answer to St. Patrick's Day, is tomorrow. Carl Salo of Owen, Wis., got Gov. Lee S. Dreyfus to proclaim March 16 as St. Urho's Day in Wisconsin with more than 700 signatures on the petition. Legend holds that St. Urho drove a plague of grasshoppers from Finland and saved grapes in Finland before the last glacial period. That 23-year-old legend was been put on paper by Mrs. Gene McCavic. It was conceived as a joke for a coffee break party in the basement of Ketola's Department Store in Owen. . . . If you see anybody tomorrow wearing royal purple and nile green — the colors of grapes and grasshoppers — repeat the magic words of St. Urho: "Heinasirkka, Heinasirkka mene taalta hiiteen" (Grasshopper, Grasshopper, go away from here).

DONALD O'CONNOR

this role in seven days."

A Happy Ending

Remember those 20 vehicles the Internal Revenue
Service seized from entertainer Jerry Lee Lewis at his
Nexbit, Miss., ranch two weeks ago for back taxes? Appar-
ently Lewis and the IRS reached an agreement Tuesday
for the return of the Fords, Cadillacs, tractors, organ,
Rolls Royce, etc. "I think Jerry and I in the future will
keep up with our own tax problems," said Lewis' wife,
Jaren.

Quotable

"I'm 89 years, four months and two weeks old but I'm not old. If I'd wanted to go off and die I would have done that. But this world is the best place I know of and I'm not anxious to leave."

— Dr. Allen Wages, now home and walking
in Palestine, Texas, after triple heart-
bypass surgery in Houston's Methodist Hospital.

tor Fevrel Pratt, saying, "This
is such a lovely song, I hate to
louse it up." O'Connor appolo-
gized in a curtain speech: "I
don't think anyone can learn

Toll on Ground
Reported High
In China Crash

HONG KONG (UPI) — Most of the
estimated 200 people killed in the
crash yesterday of a Chinese military

GAO Says Congress
Is Misled on Weapons

By John J. Fialka
Washington Star Staff Writer

centers. However, something happen
to the reports while they are being
funneled through the Pentagon.

# What Brought Down the Shah

George Ball Reports:

THE

NEW PERIL AT

THE OIL.

CROSSROADS

By George W. Ball

© 1979 The Washington Star

The most puzzling question in the aftermath of the shah's departure is not why his regime crumbled after almost three decades of autocratic power but why it did not collapse earlier.

The shah's form of government — an absolute monarchy — was a museum piece. Even as a museum piece it lacked authenticity since the Pahlavi dynasty was established only a little more than 50 years ago when the shah's father, a colonel in a Persian Cossack regiment, seized power in a military coup.

Continually conscious of his shaky claim to legitimacy, the shah staged costly extravaganzas to create the impression that his reign was in the line of succession from the great Persian emperors Cyrus and Darius, exploiting as theatrical props treasures from

This is the first of a series by George W. Ball, undersecretary of state in the Kennedy and Johnson administrations, and former U.S. ambassador to U.N. He most recently served as special adviser to President Carter on Iran.

Persia's glorious past. In 1967 he crowned himself and his empress in the spectacular setting of the Golestan Palace and the famous Peacock Throne.

Four years later he spent $125 million of public funds to celebrate the 2,500th anniversary of the founding of the Persian empire with a spectacular pageant against the backdrop of Cyrus' former capital, Persepolis.

**THOUGH MOST IRANIANS** — conditioned by their history to monarchical display — accepted the shah for what he was, the glamor of royalty had far more effect on many Americans — including presidents and secretaries of state. They instinctively accorded him a presumption of legitimacy and permanence they would never have extended to a dictator unaccoutered in the robes of royalty.

Yet, expensive as those robes might be, they did not immunize Iran from the ills endemic to most developing countries. Nor did they save the shah from the mistakes dictators habitually make.

Iran was beset by three problems that are the common curse of Third World countries: demography, urbanization and spendthrift and corrupt government. Its revolution stands out from the traditional Third World pattern only because of the country's strategic location, its huge oil resources and the role of Islamic fervor in the revolutionary process.

As with many other Third World countries, the product (apart from oil) that Iran most amply produces is more Iranians, and the consequences of an annual population increase of 2.8 percent have been twofold.

See IRAN, A-8

Fromme was using while working in a prison garden.
Busic was convicted of murder in connection with a 1976
terrorist bombing at La Guardia Airport in New York;
Fromme, a follower of Charles Manson, was convicted of
trying to assassinate President Gerald Ford as he walked
through a Sacramento, Calif., park in 1975.

More From the Marvin Trial

Testifying on cross-examination yesterday, actor Lee
Marvin was asked by Michelle Triola Marvin's attorney
to list each and every time she did things for him that he
would never forget. "In the beginning, she was light,
airy, non-serious," said the actor. "It was a relief to me at
that time in my life. Occasionally she prepared food.
Occasionally she must have cleaned the house. I think
she did care for me when I was ill, to the best of her abil-
ity." The attorney also promised to call a witness to prove
that actor Richard Doughty, who testified he had sex
with Michelle Marvin about 25 times while she was liv-
ing with Lee Marvin, is known to be a homosexual.

—Associated Press

Leonard Bernstein plays a clarinet with the Edgemon
High School band.

Playing His Song

At the party last night after the world premiere of the film version of "Hair," composer-conductor Leonard Bernstein couldn't resist sitting in with the Edgemon High School Band of Scarsdale, N.Y., when it played or of his songs. Bernstein, often associated with the piano a his instrument, played a clarinet for almost all of the band's rendition of "Maria" from "West Side Story."

Ceremony

Jones Urged

gained consciousness after firing one .32-
et into his head.

ape broadcast on the "Today" show, Jim
and his followers to "take the potion" just
learned that Rep. Leo Ryan, D-Calif., and
had been killed at a Guyana airstrip.

The men were killed on the airstrip following
Ryan's party to the cult's jungle community
gate charges that Temple members were
against their will.

Fines Mount in School Strike
No New Talks Scheduled

By Laura Murray

Washington Star Staff Writer

No new talks were scheduled today
between the Washington Teachers
Union and the D.C. Board of Educa-
tion as the teachers strike entered its
seventh school day.

A spokesman for the Federal Media-
tion Service said mediators were "in-

them union members — were
strike, the same figure it has gi-
since last week.

The school department, howev-
claimed that 47 percent of the tea-
ers were in school yesterday, up f
45 percent on Monday, and that 53
cent of the students were in school

Mideast Policy Lessons From Iran

George Ball Reports:

THE
NEW PERIL AT
THE OIL
CROSSROADS

By George W. Ball

© 1979 The Washington Star

The collapse of the shah's government in Iran has injected a new element of instability in a strategically vital area on which the West depends for an essential part of the oil required for its industrial existence. We must make certain we understand the lessons of that experience in shaping our policies for the future.

Let us first dispose of the fatuous contention that America could have saved the shah from the wrath of his people had we only flexed our military muscles more visibly by intervention in Angola or Ethiopia or even by steaming the 6th Fleet up the Gulf. There is no mystery about what happened in Iran. A whole country turned against a hated ruler in a long overdue

This is the last of a series by George W. Ball, under-
secretary of state in the Kennedy and Johnson admin-
istrations, and former U.S. ambassador to the United
Nations. He most recently served as special adviser to
President Carter on Iran.

internal revolution, which American intervention
could only have exacerbated. One of the lessons of
Vietnam is that even in situations where there is a
large measure of external aggression, American power
is blunted when the conflict has a revolutionary basis.

BEFUDDLING the current post-mortem is the nostal-
gia of those who recall that, through the CIA, we did
help restore the shah to power in 1953. But the condi-
tions then were totally different. The shah was still a
young, rather modest man who reigned rather than
ruled. The Iranian people had not yet experienced the
brutality from the secret police and the corruption by
the royal family they came to know increasingly dur-
ing the next 26 years. Furthermore, the attempted
usurper of the shah's power, Dr. Mohammed Mos-
sadegh, had betrayed his own followers by resorting to
increasingly dictatorial methods.

Thus, rather than a whole country desiring to de-
pose its ruler — which was recently the case — there
was substantial opposition to the efforts of Mossadegh
to dislodge the shah. To the extent that the United
States assisted in mobilizing that opposition — which
is still a matter of some conjecture — we could do so
only because it was there to mobilize. Even so, our as-
sistance had an unhappy byproduct: It marked the
shah in the eyes of his own people as being too much
America's creature.

Thus the shah was right in saying, as he did on
several occasions while resistance was boiling up dur-
ing the agonizing days of 1978: "We must remember
this is not 1953."

See IRAN, A-6

I
l
i
s
P

Maureen Reagan

ter, actress Maureen Reagan, urged Republicans and Democrats to support ERA in Los Angeles. Aside from that, she gave only a non-committal answer on whether she would support her father, the former California governor, in his second bid for the White House.

George Kennedy

then went by limousine another 100 miles to pick up his new car — a $20,510 stainless-steel-top Cadillac Eldorado with about every option available on and in it. From South Haven, Mich., Kennedy is driving to our Nation's Capital to film a promotional movie for the Air Force.

## Divorce Decision

The attorney for Patrick J. Nugent, son-in-law of Lady Bird Johnson, said yesterday his client would contest a divorce petition filed in January by his wife, Luci. James R. Meyers said Nugent — former general manager of a radio station owned by his mother-in-law — would contest the property settlement and custody of the couple's four children. The Nuggets were married Aug. 6, 1966, in the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception in Washington.

## Quotable

"St. Patrick's Day brings out all of the innate warmth, goodness and joy of living that Irish people have brought to this land. It joins us all in celebration of a legacy that is a vital part of our national character and way of life. Rosalynn and I welcome this annual opportunity to greet our fellow citizens of Irish ancestry and to share in the sentiments of countless others who become Irish on this special day."

— The 1979 St. Patrick's Day greeting from President Carter.

## Department Chairman

Dr. Kenneth C. Edelin, the Boston doctor whose conviction of killing an unborn fetus in a legal abortion in 1975 was overturned by the Massachusetts Supreme Court, yesterday was named chairman of the obstetrics and gynecology department at Boston University's medical school. He recently became head of the department of obstetrics and gynecology at Boston City Hospital.

## And Now Non-Adultery

Remember that stuff the other day about British theater director Michhael Kelly charging Princess Margaret's crooner friend Roddy Llewellyn with committing adultery with his wife Naima? Stuff it was. Yesterday lawyers for Kelly and his wife said the adultery bit was untrue, that Kelly is dropping his divorce action and that in August Mrs. Kelly will file a petition for divorce on grounds they will then have lived apart for at least two years.

Q and A

U.S. Sues Bank on Role